Stinging rebuke for Great Ormond Street’s management in The Lancet

Writing in the latest edition of The Lancet, one of the world’s most respected medical journals, its editor Richard Horton says,

If GOSH’s [Great Ormond Street Hospital’s] management team had been in Wigan they would almost certainly have departed by now. Perhaps GOSH is just too important to be seen to fail. Even when a child dies. (The Lancet – free registration required)

The reason for his comment that had it been another hospital, the management team would have been sacked or resigned by now is the criticisms levelled at the hospital not only for its role in the death of Baby Peter but also its subsequent failure to hand over key evidence of its mistakes to one inquiry and the claim that it provided evidence to a second inquiry – only for that inquiry’s chair to flatly contradict Great Ormond Street’s claim.

Moreover, its Chief Executive Jane Collins avoided a General Medical Council investigation into her behaviour only by virtue of coming off the medical register and the hospital has finally after three years apologised for its treatment of a whistleblower in the Baby P case. Last year around half its top medical staff signed a letter of no confidence in its senior management.

The Lancet‘s editor says:

There are unanswered questions. Have the events that led to the death of Peter Connelly been fully and transparently investigated? Have the right lessons been learned? And have those who managed (and continue to manage) children’s services at GOSH and its associated facilities been held properly responsible for the quality of care they delivered? The answers to these three questions are the same—we don’t know. These uncertainties now rest with the Secretary of State for Health to resolve as a matter of urgency.

He also speculates that the reason for Great Ormond Street seeking to avoid criticism and failing to be open about events is that it is nearing its long-term quest for foundation hospital status – meaning that criticism of its leadership is the last thing the hospital wants at this moment. However, Andrew Lansley has the power to insist these questions and failings are fully investigated – if he chooses to.

UPDATE: Richard Morris has more on the story here.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

4 Comments

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • George Thomas
    I have seen a George Monbiot Question Time clip where he explains that Wales could have been one the wealthiest parts of the UK but it's been the subject of an ...
  • cim
    I would have thought one of the biggest barriers to buildings getting built is the supply of materials and the availability of competent staff to turn those mat...
  • Pawel Urbanski
    This subject needs far more attention and more noise from Liberal Democrats, particularly in London. Rob’s direction is right, and the report is useful. But w...
  • Peter Davies
    London is a special case. There wasn't enough undeveloped land without planning permission sold to get an accurate figure. What matters is what developers think...
  • Tim
    @peter - Land prices have not been rising, at least in London, for ages. The idea that developers string out negotiations is hard to sustain in the context of t...