BBC medical records story

[Ian G Batten]

On Wed, 06 Mar 2002, Ross Anderson wrote:
> medical ethics

In Bristol, GPs knew that the death rates in child cardiac surgery were
unacceptible, and in some cases had their families and friends go to
Southampton to get better treatment.  They did not, however, accord the
same consideration to their patients.  In Bristol, people working in the
hospital knew that the death rates in child cardiac surgery were
unacceptible, but they did nothing beyond agree to give the people
responsible merit payments.  The one brave doctor who _did_ do something
found his career ruined.  All this is apparently perfectly OK, as no one
who matters has been punished (OK, one doctor was struck off, but as he
had already retired on a pension boosted by his merit payment, this is
rather a symbolic act).

In Liverpool, a doctor acting without proper supervision was able to
stockpile huge amounts of organs, obtained with distinctly questionable
consent, which although many doctors and other workers knew about it,
no one did anything until they were forced to by the fallout from
Bristol.

Harold Shipman, who went on to murder possibly several hundred people,
was caught engaged in prescription fraud to cover his own addiction to
controlled drugs.  He found no difficulty in continuing his medical
career.

Under these circumstances, I think we can assume that ``medical ethics''
mean as much as ``political honesty''.

Most doctors are honest.  The system of medicine, however, is not.

ian