Parents' accusations 'are making child protection a precarious job'

Full Story:
http://www.stopinjusticenow.com/News_0663.htm
Doctors involved in child protection say that their position has been made impossible by the decision of the General Medical Council to strike off the paediatrician Professor David Southall. The GMC panel believed the evidence given by the mother of a ten-year-old boy who died by hanging and dismissed that of Southall and a social worker who attended the interview with the mother. She said that he had accused her of murdering the child but Southall said that he had raised that as one possibility in a discussion. His claim was backed by the social worker. Rosalyn Proops, child protection officer at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said that she shared the concern expressed by paediatricians at the decision. She said: “For an experienced paediatrician to be asked by the court to produce a report on a case and then for the GMC to find the evidence of the mother, given by video link, more persuasive than two professionals who have written it down . . . what more do you need to say?” Southall has been the subject of repeated complaints to the GMC by parents who feel that he has wronged them. After the ruling, the website used by those parents has speculated about which paediatrician should be considered next. On the evening of the ruling the website forum included the following exchange (misspellings have been left uncorrected): First contributor: “The fight not over yet, their are others out there who have done the same. So we still have to fight to put things right for all the familys out here. They sould not be aloud to resign from the doctor register and walk away.” Response: “Best wishes to all affected by this. Things must happen from here on.” Second response: “Oh yes, now onto his mates . . .” The website, msbp.com, champions parents who believe that they have been the subject of false accusations. But paediatricians say that they doubt that the GMC has the ability to distinguish between false and true. Some have suggested boycotting new procedures for investigating child deaths, which come into force next April, unless the GMC is excluded from having any role in complaints. It would not be safe for any doctor to be involved in the multi-agency reviews that are planned, they argue, because they would have no protection from malicious complaints. “It’s really frightening” one doctor who asked for anonymity said. “There are lots of paediatricians who have already walked away and I can understand why. I’ve stopped myself. I’m not taking any more cases. “Child protection is very demanding. If you get it wrong, a child could be harmed and die, or if you get it wrong the other way, a child could be wrongly removed from home. The GMC judgement was perverse – it doesn’t understand the issues.” The Southall verdict “sends out a simple message to any doctor so much as thinking about engaging in child protection: ‘Don't bother. It isn’t worth it, you will lose your livelihood,’” said a statement from Professionals Against Child Abuse (PACA), a group that backs Southall.