Also in the News - Part 2

[Tuna]

1 hour ago, stripeyfox said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-66180606

 

Summary

1. Nurse Lucy Letby has been found guilty of murdering seven babies who were being looked after on a neo-natal ward
2. The murders happened at the Countess of Chester Hospital between June 2015 and June 2016
3. Letby is the UK's most prolific killer of babies in modern times
4. She has also been found guilty of attempting to murder another six babies
5. The jury was undecided on the attempted murder of a further four babies
6. The 33-year-old, originally from Hereford, denied all 22 charges against her - blaming the deaths on hospital hygiene and staffing levels

I was born in Grantham hospital in 1985, shortly thereafter Beverley Allitt started working there, she went on to murder several babies and children in the early 90s.

 

I never crossed paths with her as far as I know fortunately but I did know a lad called Bradley Gibson who I went to school with who she tried to murder with an insulin overdose, he survived fortunately with side effects.

 

There is another girl in town who ended up brain damaged after Allitt attacked her.

 

Her spectre still looms over the town.

 

It makes you wonder what could have been for those poor children who were taken when still a child. Letby, like Allitt are in many ways the worst kind of murderers as they are taking charge of the most vulnerable of people and placed in a position of ultimate trust.

[Zear0]

5 minutes ago, Tuna said:

I was born in Grantham hospital in 1985, shortly thereafter Beverley Allitt started working there, she went on to murder several babies and children in the early 90s.

 

I never crossed paths with her as far as I know fortunately but I did know a lad called Bradley Gibson who I went to school with who she tried to murder with an insulin overdose, he survived fortunately with side effects.

 

There is another girl in town who ended up brain damaged after Allitt attacked her.

 

Her spectre still looms over the town.

 

It makes you wonder what could have been for those poor children who were taken when still a child. Letby, like Allitt are in many ways the worst kind of murderers as they are taking charge of the most vulnerable of people and placed in a position of ultimate trust.

Nicely put.

 

My son was born 2 months pre-term and spent quite a bit of time in a neo-natal unit.  The staff working in those units are extraordinary.  It's incredibly hard (technically and emotionally) and I'm in awe at what they do there.  I came to know most of them and they explained that these nurses are fighting for roles in these units as it puts them in a position of ultimate care and responsibility giving them the opportunity to help the must vulnerable people they'll ever encounter (sick babies).   Whilst the motives arn't known, to read it was potentially out of boredom or to initiate contact with a doctor is just abhorrent given that role is one of the most noble professions you'll come across.

 

As you say, these are utterly defenceless children and her crime is as cowardly as it was callous.  I won't even pretend to take a high ground on this and be balanced on this, I just hope her inmates make her life a permanent hell.

[PAULCFC]

As you say cowardly.....considering she wouldn't even go to court today and i don't expect her their on Monday for sentancing.

[Wymsey]

On that video of her being arrested, her body language appeared as if "I've been caught / I did it".

[stripeyfox]

55 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

On that video of her being arrested, her body language appeared as if "I've been caught / I did it".

I guess if you'd done what she did then you know there's always a chance the police are going to come knocking one day.

[fox_up_north]

3 hours ago, bovril said:

I pity her in some way. Maybe because she's a woman. To be consumed by such evil is just unfathomable. 

No pity for her. I wish her only but the unhappiest of what remains of her life. 

 

I don't try to use the word evil for people as it dehumanises them. She could have been stopped earlier and we could be talking about 1 baby instead of god knows how many. 

[bovril]

8 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

No pity for her. I wish her only but the unhappiest of what remains of her life. 

 

I don't try to use the word evil for people as it dehumanises them. She could have been stopped earlier and we could be talking about 1 baby instead of god knows how many. 

Maybe pity isn't the word. Certainly not sympathy. I just don't understand how someone can do something that evil, multiple times.

 

I do pity her family to be fair

[fox_up_north]

Some things you can't understand and there's no point trying. She did it. She would have carried on doing it, had nobody stopped her. Some people just do things and serve no purpose.

[Foxdiamond]

7 minutes ago, fox_up_north said:

No pity for her. I wish her only but the unhappiest of what remains of her life. 

 

I don't try to use the word evil for people as it dehumanises them. She could have been stopped earlier and we could be talking about 1 baby instead of god knows how many. 

I think it important to examine the motives  as well as just throwing away the key. In some cases there have been clues in the criminal past but it seems nothing in her background or upbringing to indicate such awful acts. 

[MPH]

So pleased to be part of a race that continues to grow and change and make improvements…

 

 

 

[Paninistickers]

15 hours ago, bovril said:

I pity her in some way. Maybe because she's a woman. To be consumed by such evil is just unfathomable. 

I felt a bit of that too. 

 

Her life looked pathetic. The untidy bedroom. The teddy bears. The out of date furniture. Her lily livered woe is me texts. No sign of a regular relationship 

 

Evil lets her off though. She's the ultimate coward. A weakling. Desperate for power and relevance and chose the cruelest and easiest way to get it. 

[leicsmac]

30 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I felt a bit of that too. 

 

Her life looked pathetic. The untidy bedroom. The teddy bears. The out of date furniture. Her lily livered woe is me texts. No sign of a regular relationship 

 

Evil lets her off though. She's the ultimate coward. A weakling. Desperate for power and relevance and chose the cruelest and easiest way to get it. 

Yeah.

 

I might add though that perhaps if there were less societal judgement on what is and isn't "pathetic" then there might be less cases like this. Not necessarily in this case in particular, but in general. No need for people to conform in terms of living space or relationships or be judged if they don't.

[String fellow]

16 hours ago, PAULCFC said:

As you say cowardly.....considering she wouldn't even go to court today and i don't expect her their on Monday for sentancing.

I don't understand why defendants are allowed to not attend their court verdict or sentencing. Imo, both should be compulsory to attend, just as the stretch in prison is compulsory. It's as if the liberal culture we have is saying to these folk that they can remain in denial and don't need to face up the reality of their actions by actually hearing the verdict and sentencing in person. 

[los dedos]

So the head of the RCN seems to think if a Dr making the complaints was white he'd have been listen too .

Even though many other consultants complaining were white !

The mind boggles that some one that senior would make these kind of comments .🙄

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, String fellow said:

I don't understand why defendants are allowed to not attend their court verdict or sentencing. Imo, both should be compulsory to attend, just as the stretch in prison is compulsory. It's as if the liberal culture we have is saying to these folk that they can remain in denial and don't need to face up the reality of their actions by actually hearing the verdict and sentencing in person. 

 

I agree with your first point. If society is rightly prepared to have courts remove someone's liberty for serious crimes, then it's also reasonable for those courts to compel the accused to attend the verdict or sentencing - unless they are confirmed to be seriously ill or something. If the accused wishes to continue to deny their guilt or reject their sentence, they have that option (subject to a contempt of court ruling if they do so inappropriately) - and they may have the option to appeal. But if they do remain in denial, the judge and then the parole system will draw consequences.....

 

Which is why I disagree with your second point. Whether we have a "liberal culture" is a matter of opinion, but it's a matter of fact that pleading guilty and/or showing remorse will tend to get someone a lesser sentence or earlier parole. Remaining in denial will mostly lead to a longer sentence and/or later parole, if any. Hell, we've only just had the case of Andy Malkinson, who "remained in denial" (as the legal system saw it) of his rape conviction - for the good reason that he was innocent. Our "liberal" legal culture made him serve an extra 10 years for his "denial", until he was able to produce new evidence demonstrating his innocence.

 

Mind you, it's hard to imagine that Letby will get anything other than a whole life tariff, be that in prison or a secure mental hospital. It makes me wonder again where the line falls between "bad" and "mad". Some supposed expert yesterday was referring to Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy, but I understand that to refer to people who caused illness to others so as to draw sympathetic attention to themselves - surely not the case here, as Letby sought to conceal her appalling crimes? Clearly, there was something very wrong with her state of mind to do what she did - but when does "state of mind" become certifiable "mental illness"? Most people have a poor state of mind occasionally and some have a poor state of mind (or a mental illness) continuously, but they don't commit such crimes and wouldn't be able to claim a justification if they did so....  I do feel for the parents, having their only child commit such crimes, but obviously also for the lives & families damaged or destroyed by Letby. The managers who rejected doctors' requests for earlier action seriously need to be investigated - and to face serious consequences if found culpable - and systems need adjusting to ensure such cases are investigated earlier.

[Torquay Gunner]

Channel 4 last night devoted 45 mins of their news bulletin to the Letby case speaking to various professionals from the police, medical profession, politicians and patient groups. No one mentioned ramifications for the management board of the hospital, that ignored the concerns of seven medical consultant in 2015. Letby was allowed  to continue on the front line until 2016, when 2 more unexplained deaths finally persuaded the managers to move her into an admin role. It took another year for the police to be called in 2017. No doubt, these senior managers left the hospital with a nice little payoff and are probably still working within the NHS in some other senior capacity.  How have they not committed some sort of gross negligence?  The culture of the NHS  management will not change, until or unless people are held property accountable for their actions.

[Alf Bentley]

42 minutes ago, Torquay Gunner said:

Channel 4 last night devoted 45 mins of their news bulletin to the Letby case speaking to various professionals from the police, medical profession, politicians and patient groups. No one mentioned ramifications for the management board of the hospital, that ignored the concerns of seven medical consultant in 2015. Letby was allowed  to continue on the front line until 2016, when 2 more unexplained deaths finally persuaded the managers to move her into an admin role. It took another year for the police to be called in 2017. No doubt, these senior managers left the hospital with a nice little payoff and are probably still working within the NHS in some other senior capacity.  How have they not committed some sort of gross negligence?  The culture of the NHS  management will not change, until or unless people are held property accountable for their actions.

 

I completely agree. But I also think this problem of management/institutional culture is widespread.

It's as if managers/officials effectively (if unintentionally) put the public reputation of their institution/employer above victims, justice, safety, even life itself.

 

Just look at cases that have been in the news in recent months:

- Countless postmasters/postmistresses driven to ruin and even suicide because Post Office management, backed by the legal system, insisted on the infallibility of their I.T. system

- Repeated injustices committed by the Met Police & other forces, where their focus has been on defending the institution and denying institutional problems, wanting it to be seen as a series of "bad apples"

- The Malkinson case, where he was stitched up by Gt. Manchester Police and then the legal system kept him inside for questioning its infallibility, while making it as hard as possible for him to access evidence to prove his innocence

- The Letby case where hospital managers rejected doctors' calls for earlier action - not the first scandal in which hospital managers have defended their institution above public safety, dragged their feet, threatened whistleblowers etc.

 

This problem of management culture / blinkered loyalty to institution or employer needs wider solutions, probably with external input - some combination of legislation, regulatory reform and/or expert guidance?

Action on culture and encouragement of whistleblowing might address some issues of culture and the instinct to protect "your" institution above all else.

 

But I reckon changes are needed at a systemic level, be that at hospitals, the Met, company management, the legal system, wherever.

Even with an improved corporate culture, through loyalty, self-interest or fear many employees will instinctively defend their institution. Particularly if they have a lot to lose personally from not doing so.

Systems need to protect justice, safety and life. Reliance on individuals or changing corporate culture won't solve it all, I reckon.

[nnfox]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I completely agree. But I also think this problem of management/institutional culture is widespread.

It's as if managers/officials effectively (if unintentionally) put the public reputation of their institution/employer above victims, justice, safety, even life itself.

 

Just look at cases that have been in the news in recent months:

- Countless postmasters/postmistresses driven to ruin and even suicide because Post Office management, backed by the legal system, insisted on the infallibility of their I.T. system

- Repeated injustices committed by the Met Police & other forces, where their focus has been on defending the institution and denying institutional problems, wanting it to be seen as a series of "bad apples"

- The Malkinson case, where he was stitched up by Gt. Manchester Police and then the legal system kept him inside for questioning its infallibility, while making it as hard as possible for him to access evidence to prove his innocence

- The Letby case where hospital managers rejected doctors' calls for earlier action - not the first scandal in which hospital managers have defended their institution above public safety, dragged their feet, threatened whistleblowers etc.

 

This problem of management culture / blinkered loyalty to institution or employer needs wider solutions, probably with external input - some combination of legislation, regulatory reform and/or expert guidance?

Action on culture and encouragement of whistleblowing might address some issues of culture and the instinct to protect "your" institution above all else.

 

But I reckon changes are needed at a systemic level, be that at hospitals, the Met, company management, the legal system, wherever.

Even with an improved corporate culture, through loyalty, self-interest or fear many employees will instinctively defend their institution. Particularly if they have a lot to lose personally from not doing so.

Systems need to protect justice, safety and life. Reliance on individuals or changing corporate culture won't solve it all, I reckon.

Read "Black Box Thinking" by Matthew Syed.  The whole book is devoted to the benefits of owning and learning from mistakes and strikes the contrast between the aviation industry and how they learn from mistakes and how mistakes and misjudgements are actively encouraged to be reported.  There's little emphasis on blame and much greater emphasis on learning. 

 

Then there's the medical profession (and countless other public and private organisations) where the fear of blame, ruined reputations and ultimately loss of employment are major drivers to cover up and deny potential wrongs.

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, nnfox said:

Read "Black Box Thinking" by Matthew Syed.  The whole book is devoted to the benefits of owning and learning from mistakes and strikes the contrast between the aviation industry and how they learn from mistakes and how mistakes and misjudgements are actively encouraged to be reported.  There's little emphasis on blame and much greater emphasis on learning. 

 

Then there's the medical profession (and countless other public and private organisations) where the fear of blame, ruined reputations and ultimately loss of employment are major drivers to cover up and deny potential wrongs.

Right. If someone thinks they're going to professionally get it right in the kidneys for making a mistake, they're not likely to freely admit that mistake, that's simple self-preservation and the reserve of pretty much anyone outside those with the most massive integrity.

 

So, if you're going to catch these mistakes, you need to either encourage the people involved by removing the fear of nasty consequences, or you have to circumvent them and monitor them consistently and find such mistakes yourself.

[Bordersfox]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Right. If someone thinks they're going to professionally get it right in the kidneys for making a mistake, they're not likely to freely admit that mistake, that's simple self-preservation and the reserve of pretty much anyone outside those with the most massive integrity.

 

So, if you're going to catch these mistakes, you need to either encourage the people involved by removing the fear of nasty consequences, or you have to circumvent them and monitor them consistently and find such mistakes yourself.

I thought that there was going to be a change in culture within the NHS to encourage reporting, to own mistakes and to learn from them.  I'm sure I remember reading something along those lines a few years ago but I forget where. 

 

Assuming it's not happened.  The structure within the NHS is, or certainly was, fairly hierarchical, a hang up from its military origins.  I don't suppose that helps with open and constructive dialogue about mistakes.  

[nnfox]

24 minutes ago, Bordersfox said:

I thought that there was going to be a change in culture within the NHS to encourage reporting, to own mistakes and to learn from them.  I'm sure I remember reading something along those lines a few years ago but I forget where. 

 

Assuming it's not happened.  The structure within the NHS is, or certainly was, fairly hierarchical, a hang up from its military origins.  I don't suppose that helps with open and constructive dialogue about mistakes.  

Yeah, anecdotally I hear of organisations coming up with the idea of embracing mistakes and learning from.  It's often from well meaning bosses who genuinely buy in to the theory.  The trouble is the macro of the whole thing prevents it from happening, i.e., even though the boss says it's ok and maybe policy too, the relevant regulations and potentially laws don't support it, so it's doomed to failure without massive change throughout entire industries.

 

The civil aviation authority and air accident investigation bureau have significant power in an industry that can only exist where safety of its users is of paramount importance.  It's necessary that they have processes in place that ensures safety and encouraging people to come forward to report their own mistakes and mistakes of others in the absolute knowledge that learning how to minimise repeats in future is the aim.  Afterall, if planes dropping out of the sky was a common occurrence, nobody would book plane tickets.

 

The same pressure isn't really on public sector organisations, people will continue to get sick and need hospitals, children will always need social services intervention and people will get robbed/assaulted/go missing and the police will always be needed too, all regardless of their record of how these massive organisations can improve their service and importantly, prevent very real harm to their service users.

 

It's a problem and I don't see it being fixed anytime soon.

[Bordersfox]

4 minutes ago, nnfox said:

Yeah, anecdotally I hear of organisations coming up with the idea of embracing mistakes and learning from.  It's often from well meaning bosses who genuinely buy in to the theory.  The trouble is the macro of the whole thing prevents it from happening, i.e., even though the boss says it's ok and maybe policy too, the relevant regulations and potentially laws don't support it, so it's doomed to failure without massive change throughout entire industries.

 

The civil aviation authority and air accident investigation bureau have significant power in an industry that can only exist where safety of its users is of paramount importance.  It's necessary that they have processes in place that ensures safety and encouraging people to come forward to report their own mistakes and mistakes of others in the absolute knowledge that learning how to minimise repeats in future is the aim.  Afterall, if planes dropping out of the sky was a common occurrence, nobody would book plane tickets.

 

The same pressure isn't really on public sector organisations, people will continue to get sick and need hospitals, children will always need social services intervention and people will get robbed/assaulted/go missing and the police will always be needed too, all regardless of their record of how these massive organisations can improve their service and importantly, prevent very real harm to their service users.

 

It's a problem and I don't see it being fixed anytime soon.

Great points, well made.

[dsr-burnley]

18 hours ago, Paninistickers said:

I felt a bit of that too. 

 

Her life looked pathetic. The untidy bedroom. The teddy bears. The out of date furniture. Her lily livered woe is me texts. No sign of a regular relationship 

 

Evil lets her off though. She's the ultimate coward. A weakling. Desperate for power and relevance and chose the cruelest and easiest way to get it. 

At risk of trivialising your point, how can furniture be "out of date"? 

[fox_up_north]

That's the real issue here. Top class WUM thinking.

[The Doctor]

On 19/08/2023 at 00:03, MPH said:

So pleased to be part of a race that continues to grow and change and make improvements…

 

 

 

I feel like not enough is said about the pettyness of Ea Nasir. These are cuneiforms, they were markings in clay that were designed to be wiped clean and reused, but Ea Nasir kept loads of his complaint letters in a room in his house, which ended up burning and setting the cuneiforms like a kiln. We have nearly 4000 year old complaint letters because this guy was a petty jerk.