Patients Betrayed
The NHS has many strengths, but one of its greatest weaknesses is that it is a giant bureaucracy which is run like an old-fashioned nationalised industry - where patients (customers) are treated as if they are of secondary importance.
The latest NHS scandal to illustrate this problem has been unearthed in Solihull Hospital in England where hundreds of breast cancer patients where kept completely in the dark about concerns over a rogue surgeon - Ian Paterson - who carried out 'cleavage saving' mastectomies contrary to national guidelines.
The reason for the national guidelines is that there is a greater risk of the cancer returning, if any breast tissue is left behind after surgery - so the surgeon was defying the good practice rules of his own profession.
Now despite concerns being raised about Ian Paterson as far back as 2003, the surgeon continued with his controversial procedure until 2007 - and the local NHS hospital kept the whole business under wraps until 2010 when the senior management team were replaced.
Yet the surgeon continued to work at the local NHS hospital and was paid his normal salary until November 2012 - one month after Ian Paterson was finally suspended by the General Medical Council (GMC).
Unbelievably, an independent report into the whole affair concluded that the local NHS trust
failed to tell the surgeon's patients that they may be at risk until years after their surgery in some cases - because of “weak and indecisive leadership” and a culture of “secrecy and containment” which prevented fellow doctors and trust managers from telling Ian Paterson to do his job properly.
The independent report also concluded that the NHS trust became obsessed with 'pursuing dat'a that would prove whether or not Mr Paterson's procedures exposed patients to greater risk of their breast cancer recurring - instead of alerting patients to the potential risks of the disease recurring.
Especially as it turned out that the surgeon (Ian Paterson) had not obtained proper consent from his patients to carry out only a partial rather than a full mastectomy - which meant that NHS managers had grounds to intervene from the very start when his rogue behaviour first came to light.
I cannot imagine a more serious offence than a doctor duping his patients - by withholding crucial information - yet this man continued to work and be paid his full salary for years which tells you something about how the NHS is run and how much the service is dominated by vested interests.
No wonder the patients and families involved feel betrayed.
