Lucy Letby Case #23

[gimmethattea]

It's a safeguarding officer who focuses specifically on adults who work with children if there are concerns. Don't need proof, just a concern and they can investigate, work with senior management and police if needed. Senior management tend to take things seriously if local authority safeguarding get involved.
I've referred to the LADO for concerns around a nurse working with children and someone who volunteered at a women's refuge so they cover all areas.

I don't know how it works in medical settings, but working in education, we have regular training in child protection and safeguarding and are always reminded to report any concern, no matter how small and even if that concern is found to be nothing. We have it drilled into us every time we have the meetings. We have designated safeguarding leads we can report it too.

Would the hospital have people like this in charge they could report to?

 

[OldBlondie]

No mark today, but Dan had just started tweeting. Is mark ever coming back?

 

[Daisydunn15]

I don't know how it works in medical settings, but working in education, we have regular training in child protection and safeguarding and are always reminded to report any concern, no matter how small and even if that concern is found to be nothing. We have it drilled into us every time we have the meetings. We have designated safeguarding leads we can report it too.

Would the hospital have people like this in charge they could report to?

I'm a nurse and we're told the same. The trusts I've worked in have all had their own safeguarding teams but then you have the local authority too who you can report to.
Waiting 3 days for a team meeting to raise concerns is pretty poor practice, safeguarding concerns should be raised ASAP by the person with the concern.

 

[DellaC]

Daniel is tweeting.

Courts not even started yet and he's typed at least 100 words.

Ooooh somebody's had his Weetabix

 

[Milktray]

He's playing the 'you're exaggerating because you didn't call the police' card again.

I think one of the long term consequences of this case is going to be that they'll put in place a specific process to follow if you believe that a healthcare worker is causing harm. Phoning the police and having them show up at the unit when your managers have said to STFU is how you end up targeted by bosses. FTSU won't cover something like this. You can report to the NMC/GMC for some professions, but a lot aren't regulated. I can't think what I'd actually do in the position of those consultants.

I know. Mad that BM is going down that route. The long and short of it, is that 'employment' law was in play.
And really BM should know best, as when it comes to 'legalities' in the work place, everything needs to go through the correct channels. Even upper management would need to go through legal/HR to see what is acceptable. Ultimately, at that point, it was just 'rumours' and it needed investigating.
Accusation of murder/foul play is extremely serious without evidence. The doctors knew what was going on but was in a situation where there was no smoking gun.

 

[Tofino]

No mark today, but Dan had just started tweeting. Is mark ever coming back?

He’s got more important things to report on…(these were his reports from yesterday)

 

[Milktray]

He’s got more important things to report on…(these were his reports from yesterday)

View attachment 2046901

I suppose, as per the nurse yesterday, Mark may be taking a 'mental health' break from it. These articles yesterday are lightweight, junior reporter stuff.

 

[Takemetoyourbuffet]

He’s got more important things to report on…(these were his reports from yesterday)

View attachment 2046901

Because I had no idea where in Chester I could get a coffee or a curly blow

 

[LilyRose1234]

My perspective, FWIW (not a lot ) is that BM is doing his job well. This is what a fair trial looks like in practice, it’s not easy reading and for those on the stand it’ll be unpleasant but his job is to challenge the prosecutions evidence. He wouldn’t be doing his job if he didn’t question witnesses versions of events, challenge their credibility, ask why they didn’t call the police (because if I was on the jury it’s what I’d be wondering) etc etc etc. Whilst it may feel like it, and sound personal, it isn’t, and knowing plenty of barristers through work, he won’t be relishing this, it is just his job. Obviously if you’re the one on the stand, it’s difficult not to take it personally, but like I said we’re seeing a fair trial play out. I’d be far more concerned if he wasn’t cross examining any witnesses and just letting their account go on the record as truth without any questions or challenge

 

[Cheddar Chalpupa]

I know. Mad that BM is going down that route. The long and short of it, is that 'employment' law was in play.
And really BM should know best, as when it comes to 'legalities' in the work place, everything needs to go through the correct channels. Even upper management would need to go through legal/HR to see what is acceptable. Ultimately, at that point, it was just 'rumours' and it needed investigating.
Accusation of murder/foul play is extremely serious without evidence. The doctors knew what was going on but was in a situation where there was no smoking gun.

I'm sure he does know that, he's chancing the jury not knowing that though.

 

[DellaC]

My perspective, FWIW (not a lot ) is that BM is doing his job well. This is what a fair trial looks like in practice, it’s not easy reading and for those on the stand it’ll be unpleasant but his job is to challenge the prosecutions evidence. He wouldn’t be doing his job if he didn’t question witnesses versions of events, challenge their credibility, ask why they didn’t call the police (because if I was on the jury it’s what I’d be wondering) etc etc etc. Whilst it may feel like it, and sound personal, it isn’t, and knowing plenty of barristers through work, he won’t be relishing this, it is just his job. Obviously if you’re the one on the stand, it’s difficult not to take it personally, but like I said we’re seeing a fair trial play out. I’d be far more concerned if he wasn’t cross examining any witnesses and just letting their account go on the record as truth without any questions or challenge

Totally agree.

But I'm still gonna witch about him

Although he looks a bit like Judge Rinder and I like him

 

[OldBlondie]

So Dr Gibbs was also starting to notice the association. She really did escalate with these last few babies, and they are going to provide very strong evidence against her. She’s done for, I'm sure of it now

Dans updates are far more detailed today than that last day, thank goodness

 

[docmum]

And I’ve just remembered there are other parents who felt Lucy behaved inappropriately after their babies died. Like the baby bath comment. Parents who hadn’t met each other and now a doctor all reporting inappropriate behaviour. It must make them feel sick to the stomach.

without wanting to revisit things we’ve discussed, this is the type of behaviour that had me wondering if she had been searching them on Facebook to see if any of them had communicated/become friends and were at risk of comparing her behaviour around the babies or after the death.

 

[slingo16]

Have we heard from the pathologist who gave the original causes of death during the trial?

 

[Milktray]

I'm sure he does know that, he's chancing the jury not knowing that though.

Of course but easy enough for prosecution to pick apart and discredit BM defence.

 

[docmum]

He's playing the 'you're exaggerating because you didn't call the police' card again.

I think one of the long term consequences of this case is going to be that they'll put in place a specific process to follow if you believe that a healthcare worker is causing harm. Phoning the police and having them show up at the unit when your managers have said to STFU is how you end up targeted by bosses. FTSU won't cover something like this. You can report to the NMC/GMC for some professions, but a lot aren't regulated. I can't think what I'd actually do in the position of those consultants.

its going to change the clinical lead and clinical director roles entirely. Though overall it may give doctors more responsibility across the multidisciplinary teams and out of the hands of non clinical management which can’t come soon enough imo!

 

[SFV]

There is a horrific case from years ago in Ireland, Prof Micheal Neary, a gynaecologist and obstetrician working in a hospital in Drogheda. He unnecessarily performed hysterectomies on over 100 women, some of them really young, he brutalised them, telling them he saved their lives. If I remember correctly, it was two student nurses who were persistent and continually raising concerns, the other staff who had worked with him for years gossiped about him, but never took their concerns any further. The medical profession closed ranks to protects him and the hospital. Medical files went missing. There was a huge inquiry in Ireland costing million and while he was removed from the medical register, he was never criminally charged.

Hopefully, Letby's case, found guilty or not, will change things so medical staff who have suspicions are legally obliged to report their suspicions to an independent body (outside of the hospital management) long before there are multiple victims.

 

[OldBlondie]

Shared it before, but I’m sharing it again. I would be willing to bet most other healthcare workers have 5 of these red flags max

These are also the kinds of things the police would be looking for too, when trying to find patterns and certain behaviours that stand out

 

[docmum]

I agree, surely you can't just phone the police because you would need evidence and I doubt the hospital would appreciate it either.

I think in this context, you can't just phone the police, as much as you'd perhaps want to.

if a patient leaves with a cannula still in then the police need to be called. That’s a right faff in itself
Think there’ll have to be a hospital middle man who is there for safeguarding and whistleblowing, and will review cases with a low threshold to report onward. Don’t forget innocent staff need to be protected from weirdo colleagues who might try reporting them inappropriately.

 

[Tofino]

Have we heard from the pathologist who gave the original causes of death during the trial?

No we’ve not heard from any pathologists yet.