Southall Samuels and Spencer up before the GMC CNEP

Link to Events calander

General Medical Council Press Office
Dr Martin Philip SAMUELS, Dr Stephen Andrew SPENCER, David Patrick SOUTHALL
From : 8 May 2008 To : 9 May 2008

Category : Fitness to Practise Hearings

Info :

Fitness to Practise Panel
Planned dates: 8 May to 11 July 2008
St James’s Building, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ

The Fitness to Practise Panel will meet at St James’s Building, 79 Oxford Street, Manchester, M1 6FQ to consider a case under the Professional Conduct Committee Rules of serious professional misconduct.

Name: Dr Martin Philip SAMUELS
GMC Reference Number: 2732178
Area of practice: Staffordshire

Name: Dr Stephen Andrew SPENCER
GMC Reference Number: 2305893
Area of practice: Staffordshire

Name: David Patrick SOUTHALL
GMC Reference Number: 1491739
Area of practice: Staffordshire

Dr Samuels

It is alleged that Dr Samuels was practising as a paediatrician at the Royal Brompton and North Staffordshire Hospitals and a trial was commenced in 1990 to determine the benefit or otherwise of continuous negative extrathoracic pressure (CNEP) in babies with respiratory failure (“the CNEP trial”). It is alleged that in his role as an administrator of the CNEP trial he failed to ensure that appropriate procedures were in place to obtain informed parental consent to the patients’ participation in the trial. It is further alleged that his actions in this regard were inappropriate, inadequate, not in the patients’ best interests and likely to bring the medical profession into disrepute.


Dr Spencer

It is alleged that Dr Spencer was practising as a Consultant Paediatrician at North Staffordshire Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent and on 29 November 1989, he applied to the Ethics Committee of the North Staffordshire Royal Infirmary (“the Ethics Committee”) for approval of a trial entitled “A randomised controlled trial of continuous sub-atmospheric (negative) extra thoracic pressure (CNEP) in neonatal respiratory failure.” (“the CNEP trial”). It is alleged that his actions in this regard were inappropriate, inadequate, not in the patients’ best interests and likely to bring the medical profession into disrepute.

It is further alleged that on 14 December 1992 Patient A was born by Caesarian section at the North Staffordshire Maternity Hospital and that following her birth, Patient A was entered into the CNEP trial. It is alleged that during his involvement in Patient A’s care, he failed to ensure that the appropriate steps were taken to treat Patient A’s hypoxia until 12:30pm on 15 December 1992 and that he failed to ensure that appropriate and regular blood pressure checks were undertaken and/or recorded in her notes. It is alleged that his actions in this regard were inappropriate, inadequate, not in the patients’ best interests and likely to bring the medical profession into disrepute.

Dr Southall

It is alleged that Dr Southall was practising as a Consultant Paediatrician at the Royal Brompton and North Staffordshire Hospitals and that on 29 November 1989, he applied to the Ethics Committee of the North Staffordshire Royal Infirmary (“the Ethics Committee”) for approval of a trial entitled “A randomised controlled trial of continuous sub-atmospheric (negative) extra thoracic pressure (CNEP) in neonatal respiratory failure.” (“the CNEP trial”). It is alleged that the application inaccurately described the procedures that would be applied to each patient and/or, the number of patients that would be required for the trial. The design of the trial was such that it did not sufficiently minimise the possibility of bias. It is alleged that his actions in this regard were inappropriate, inadequate, not in the patients’ best interests and likely to bring the medical profession into disrepute.


In accordance with Rule 41(2) of the General Medical Council (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2004, the Panel may decide to exclude the public from the proceedings or any part of the proceedings, where they consider that the circumstances of the case outweigh the public interest in holding the hearing in public.

Link

What goes around comes around, lets see what happens here then.
The truth will ou in the end.

I hope there will be some provision for a flogging - before the hanging.

Right so, no more death penalty cases for you then CT!

In general, I am against the death penalty ... but I do entertain the odd exception ... and this unholy trinity of oddities ... should make for an entertaining exception.

PS. The Americans have no imagination. I do not believe that the American Way is either cruel or unusual enough for this unholy threesome ... by rights, the British Way of punishment should provide us with some much needed entertainment.

Now stop it, David baiting is illegal!

But it's funny .... and entertaining fun ...

Uhhm does that place you in the "child abuser" bracket then?

What do you call somebody who hides life threatening diagnosis's in secret files away from every other medic, leaving the children without any care for those disorders then ....

I love the thought of chucking eggs and tomatoes at paedophobes in the stocks ... and of course I enjoy a good hanging ...