Here is Sarah's personal message about the IOP yesterday:
General Medical Council vs Dr Sarah Myhill Interim Orders Panel HearIng December 23rd 2010 Christmas EVE 2010
I was summoned to a 4th IOP by the GMC and appeared yesterday. I represented myself and was accompanied by my friend Peter Endicott.
Initially I made a “preliminary submission”. These have to do with legal arguments and they took up much of the day. As you know my attempts to get justice through Judicial Review at the High Court were thwarted by the weather. My Judicial Review is now mid January. My presentation to the IOP therefore was essentially my presentation to the Judicial Review.
I argued that the GMC had acted illegally with respect to their own Rules, the 1983 Medical Act, the Data Protection Act and Human Rights legislation. Furthermore the GMC were in breach of their own procedures both before and after my October IOP. I also informed the Panel that members of the GMC prosecution and adjudication team had been reported by me to the GMC for dishonesty and malfeasance in public office. One had misled me with respect to my rights to call witnesses. Another had told lies in response to procedural and evidential matters raised in my letters to the GMC. I presumed that investigation of these officers was underway.
These detailed arguments are posted at
http://www.supportdrmyhill.co.uk/latest_news.html
In the event I had to argue my case with the GMC at every turn and so my presentation did not proceed as smoothly as it was written. The full transcript will be made available shortly.
My most important point was that the GMC have so far failed to particularise the allegations. This was despite me reminding them of this in November and the GMC legal team telling me that they were working on this. However the Panel and the GMC prosecutor, Gareth Branston, argued that because I had responded then I must know what the allegations were. As I commented, I was invited to submit observations, not respond to allegations. I asked the Panel to tell me what they thought the allegations were, but I was told that I was not permitted to cross-examine the Panel.
This is a clear breach of Humans Rights whereby the accused must know what he is accused of.
The second section had to do with details of my case. The essential background reading to my case had been carefully and logically documented and was contained within three bulky documents namely:
• The Defence Document - a list of all the GMC procedural and evidential errors
• The Patients’ Experience Document – all the letters, emails and petition comments had been collated in an organised way so that the GMC could see exactly who had been helped by my advice and advice contained within the website. Importantly there were many communications from patients who had been directly harmed as a result of GMC actions against me. Many communications were from fellow professionals supportive of my approach to medicine.
• The Medical References Document- this contained nearly 400 references which underpinned the opinions expressed on my website. Those relating to specific concerns raised by the GMC were flagged up separately.
All these documents were made available to the GMC in good time before my Oct 7th IOP. I assumed that the Panel had read them. However in the bundle of documents presented to me for my December IOP, nearly all this documentation was missing. At this point it was clear to me that the October IOPs had read none of these substantial submissions.
So again I made available to the GMC these three documents, again they were sent electronically in good time for yesterday’s IOP to my case officer Paul Bridge in Manchester.
As I opened my presentation of my case I asked the Panel to show me that the above three documents were in front of them and that they had read them. The documents were not there. The excuse was that the weather meant that the pen drive on which these documents were contained was stuck in the post. I advised the GMC that email was an option. The GMC managed to find the relevant computer expert with the skills to open an email with attachments and so at 3pm the GMC started to print out the 243 page Defence Document, the many communications that made up the PED and the nearly 400 references of the MRD.
Although it was clear to me that the GMC had not listened to nor heard any of my previous submissions (and this were stated in the October Determination), it was now clear even to them that they were unable to read everything I had submitted in the time left in the day. So the Panel arranged for a further IOP on Jan 6th. However they suggested that they may be able to come to a Determination before then if the information that I had submitted was found adequate. Before hearing my evidence, prosecutor Gareth Branston had recommended to the Panel at the start of the day that to continue my suspension from medical practise was appropriate.
The GMC have made it their normal practise to accept any submission from any source, often anonymous, in their efforts to find evidence against me. An interesting submission was presented to the Panel and used by GMC prosecutor Gareth Branston in his case against me:
Mr Bridge
I would like to draw your attention to the following information which is doing the rounds on the internet. It would appear that Dr Myhill is still practising as a dr despite being suspended by the GMC. Surely this is unacceptable and unlawful?
Joan Russett
“Sarah became an impromptu midwife in the early hours of Saturday morning when family friend, Rosemary Hogg, went into labour her home in one of the most rurally isolated areas of Powys. Hearing that the birth was imminent and no other held was available. Dr Myhill wasted no time in gathering together her kit and setting off on foot across the mountainside despite bitter winds, sub-zero temperatures and four inches of icy snow packed hard on the ground. After helping to bring the new babes safely into the world, Sarah ensured that mother and offspring were tucked up snug and warm and doing well before returning home next morning”
I believe the evidence base for this statement can be found at:
http://www.supportdrmyhill.co.uk/impromptu_midwife.html
The full transcript will be posted at
http://www.supportdrmyhill.co.uk/ as soon as it comes available.
Happy Christmas to you all!
Sarah
