What should the consequences be to a GP practice

Dis86 said:
No. You're working on an assumption that every death that doesn't go to the coroner is normal. That's incorrect. The correct thinking would be that they are ASSUMED to be normal deaths. Negligence may or may not have played a part.
Click to expand...

So you just want every death to have a post mortem and a coroner's inquest and every single act anyone does to be recorded, just in case?

You realise you're wandering off into cloud cuckoo land?
 
Minstadave said:
But the stomach was inside a dead person, haven't we already been through this?

Did the surgeon realise that cutting open the stomach of a dead donor, assessed as fit fororgan donation by the transplant team, risked contaminating the organs with the leak of gastric fungae that wouldn't be picked up or managed by the standard organ donation procedures? I can believe that. The harvesting surgeon may not even have been a transplant surgeon.
Click to expand...

The stomach was inside a recently deceased individual. That doesn't change the nature of their stomach contents. The transplant team won't be expecting the organs to be contaminated as that's not a standard procedure. I'd expect said highly qualified person to ASK if they didn't know.

It's really easy you know - watch.

"Hi, I harvested the organs from Mr X, here they are for you. Oh btw, I accidentally cut the stomach whilst doing so - is this going to cause an issue?"

See how easy that was?

You know they can be harmful, I know they can be harmful, Tres clearly showed he knew they could be harmful. How did this guy not?!
 
Minstadave said:
So you just want every death to have a post mortem and a coroner's inquest and every single act anyone does to be recorded, just in case?

You realise you're wandering off into cloud cuckoo land?
Click to expand...

No. I haven't said that at all. You do realise, yet again, you're making up things I haven't said? A certain number of failures in any system won't be detected. You still work to minimise those failures even though you can't quantify them.
 
Dis86 said:
No. You're working on an assumption that every death that doesn't go to the coroner is normal. That's incorrect. The correct thinking would be that they are ASSUMED to be normal deaths. Negligence may or may not have played a part.
Click to expand...

I'M OUT, I've seen you arguing before with people but this is at another level of stupid.
 
Dis86 said:
No. I haven't said that at all. You do realise, yet again, you're making up things I haven't said? A certain number of failures in any system won't be detected. You still work to minimise those failures even though you can't quantify them.
Click to expand...

Which is a massive part of what we do on the NHS, which you would be aware of, if you had the slightest knowledge about what you were talking about.
 
Dis86 said:
.It's really easy you know - watch.

"Hi, I harvested the organs from Mr X, here they are for you. Oh btw, I accidentally cut the stomach whilst doing so - is this going to cause an issue?"

See how easy that was?
Click to expand...

To which both you and I agreed they would probably not have changed the plan for. Although we are both ignorant of as neither of us are transplant doctors.

But if the answer would have been "follow standard surgical processes to reduce contamination and we will carry on" then you're entire argument is pointless.
 
Minstadave said:
Which is a massive part of what we do on the NHS, which you would be aware of, if you had the slightest knowledge about what you were talking about.
Click to expand...

Right, which was entirely my point to fox there who seems to be struggling to understand that simple point...
 
NVP said:
Student dr?
Click to expand...

Perhaps that's one the docs here could answer but he was listed as being a surgeon and my assumption (see, there's that word) would be they wouldn't refer to a student as a surgeon and a student wouldn't be harvesting organs given how important they are.
 
Dis86 said:
Right, which was entirely my point to fox there who seems to be struggling to understand that simple point...
Click to expand...

I answered in post 108, I live in this world but you don't want to accept that it happens.
I addressed the investigations ages ago.
You just want everybody struck off.
 
SexyGreyFox said:
I answered in post 108, I live in this world but you don't want to accept that it happens.
I addressed the investigations ages ago.
You just want everybody struck off.
Click to expand...

You did. You stated that you've seen remarkably few people struck off despite a heck of a lot of significant failings and a huge number of unnecessary patient deaths. I want people to be properly held to accord like they would in any other career for their failings.
 
Dis86 said:
Perhaps that's one the docs here could answer but he was listed as being a surgeon and my assumption (see, there's that word) would be they wouldn't refer to a student as a surgeon and a student wouldn't be harvesting organs given how important they are.
Click to expand...
Only guessing based off it being a teaching hospital. I could ask my sister who's an orthopod surgeon, but that would involve explaining this train wreck of a thread :D
 
NVP said:
Sure sounds like science to me :confused: no wilful misinterpretation, science is based on educated "guesswork", no?
Click to expand...

Personally I find medicine is far more about people than science.

Dis86 said:
You did. You stated that you've seen remarkably few people struck off despite a heck of a lot of significant failings and a huge number of unnecessary patient deaths. I want people to be properly held to accord like they would in any other career for their failings.
Click to expand...

And it's been explained that striking people off is not an effective way of dealing with issues, at length. Careers where individuals are scapegoated for complex systematic failures, which are the vast majority, are behind the times. The NHS has been there, it doesn't work, for obvious reasons.
 
Dis86 said:
You did. You stated that you've seen remarkably few people struck off despite a heck of a lot of significant failings and a huge number of unnecessary patient deaths. I want people to be properly held to accord like they would in any other career for their failings.
Click to expand...

I did actually say that the 3 I know of in the last 10 years didn't involve deaths.
If you want to strike off every Clinician for negligence then your NHS won't have any Clinicians because virtually all of them have made mistakes.
 
@Minstadave @SexyGreyFox

I'll explain again. Nowhere have I said sack people for mistakes. Nowhere. What I have said repeatedly is hold them to account for failings. We'll take @tres example of him screwing up a cannula insertion. He screwed up. Bad Tres. He should learn from that and not screw up any more. What he shouldn't do is then pretend it didn't happen and not do anything about it. He should, as I've suggest perhaps write 3 little words on the patients charts or records or somewhere "failed cannula insertion". That means that should the patient develop one of the numerous symptoms of cellulitis another doctor who comes to treat the patient may put 2 and 2 together because they have that extra little bit of information available to them. They may not, but at least it was provided. It covers Tres's back and also gives the patient that little greater chance of survival. Win-win. All for 3 little words.

Accidentally cut stomach. 3 little words.
 
Dis86 said:
@Minstadave @SexyGreyFox

I'll explain again. Nowhere have I said sack people for mistakes. Nowhere. What I have said repeatedly is hold them to account for failings. We'll take @tres example of him screwing up a cannula insertion. He screwed up. Bad Tres. He should learn from that and not screw up any more. What he shouldn't do is then pretend it didn't happen and not do anything about it. He should, as I've suggest perhaps write 3 little words on the patients charts or records or somewhere "failed cannula insertion". That means that should the patient develop one of the numerous symptoms of cellulitis another doctor who comes to treat the patient may put 2 and 2 together because they have that extra little bit of information available to them. They may not, but at least it was provided. It covers Tres's back and also gives the patient that little greater chance of survival. Win-win. All for 3 little words.

Accidentally cut stomach. 3 little words.
Click to expand...

Bored now. I too, am out.
 
Dis86 said:
He should, as I've suggest perhaps write 3 little words on the patients charts or records or somewhere "failed cannula insertion".
Click to expand...
Haha would you also expect that after every blood test?? Stop now man, it is getting quite embarrassing. Perhaps stick to acting :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom