Yes - but nobody dares to blow the whistle - so the chance of the CQC finding out is pretty small.
On a related note: In the last 3 years I have seen all sorts of illegality happening in Trusts that are ‘not seen’ by the CQC. [No lists today]. Would I blow the whistle? Of course not. Why? I’ve read Peter Duffy’s books.
Law is useless until it is activated.
Unfortunately due to forum rules I would not be able to give good answer. To do so will open me risk of ‘advertising’ something. However, Google is a great thing.
You don’t understand. Actions speak louder than words. Hence the actions of these ‘organisations’ that are meant to progress health services tells a different story. What’s that? Well you’d have to study:
The ‘discipline’ is called ‘special measures’ or sumik like that. I’ve worked in a small handful of health services where special measures were implemented. ‘Everybody’ was overjoyed by the special measures. Why - because they told me in almost these exact words, “Now we get the money we so desperately needed.” It wasn’t for me - nor did I have time to verify what they were saying, but I’m talking about word from people at the top. So in essence, this is how it works: Your masters do the political and financial strangulation which drives services to the brink of suffocation. Then ‘discipline’ such as special measures gives um a bit o’ oxygen.
I have first hand knowledge of spot inspections being leaked. What could I do with that information? Raise a concern? To whom? Who would believe me - when the people who told me how the leaks happened would disavow saying anything of the sort. I don’t need a prolonged ‘holiday’ in Diego Garcia. Is that okayyy? If you don’t know what that means in figurative language, Google could be your friend.
Hence I totally agree with passivity. I’m not gonna blow the whistle on regulators or Trusts. Diego Garcia is not for me. Well if you don’t like the Diego Garcia analogy, how about Australia? Speak to Peter Bolsin about that. Why? He caused a rumpus that led to an inquiry costing £14 million for an inquiry way back when. Then was exiled to Australia. Ahhh… But lessons learned. Some don’t understand that people and organisations repeat mistakes around 5 times before they learn. You want research evidence on that? Gemini Deep Search may assist.
Public left short? Of course they are. It’s a massive financial machinery. Some thought that patients came first. Again look around: actions speak louder than words. Loads of people know that ‘the patient is incidental’ - just there to keep the machinery with a pretentious purpose for existence. Joe and Jane Public don’t know what’s going on.
Is statistical Joe and Jane interested in excess deaths. Do they write to their MPs about excess deaths in A&E departments around this land? All Joe and Jane want is to avoid 12 hours on a trolley.
Okay bring it back to mental health. Do Joe and Jane understand that there are waiting lists within waiting lists at mental health Trusts across this land. Do they know that people are ejected from clinics because waiting lists are too long. [Caution: I can’t keep inserting the word ‘some’; in all this so assume ‘some’ in any statement I may make - and I don’t know how much some is.] I saw with my own eyes how a secretary in one Trust just struck people off clinic lists. She was directed by some high powered medic in the Trust. So she had to do as told, else! What am I to do with that knowledge? Blow whistle? Nope - no Diego Garcia for me, thank you very much.
What about capacity assessments? Yeah what about them? I saw hard evidence of ‘various departments’ introducing capacity tests before a patient could be offered appointments for assessments. I refused to comply. It was pure nonsense, but but… somebody could make a case for that sort of thing. I mean I too could conjure up the same. I just won’t. So what was I to do with that? Raise a concern. Look, I could be raising concerns day and night on all manner of rubbish going on in Trusts. Where will that take me? To ‘Diego Garcia’ - I’m not doing it!
So - find Peter Duffy on YouTube - long talk about 1 hr and his other ‘materials’. Listen read and learn. Other stories and resources to check:
1.PIDA: a trap for fools.
2. Dr. Stephen Bolsin: An anaesthetist at the Bristol Royal Infirmary in the late 1980s and early 1990s. He raised serious concerns about the high mortality rates for babies undergoing complex heart surgery, eventually leading to a major public inquiry (The Bristol Royal Infirmary Inquiry). His actions were crucial in highlighting failures in clinical governance and monitoring surgical outcomes.
3. Helene Donnelly: A nurse who worked at Stafford Hospital (part of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust). She raised concerns about appalling standards of care, neglect, and high mortality rates on the wards in the mid-2000s. She became a key witness in the Francis Inquiry, which exposed systemic failings throughout the Trust.
4. Dr. Minh Alexander: She raised concerns about patient safety and management issues within the NHS. Her case, and her subsequent extensive research and advocacy, have highlighted significant problems with how the NHS handles whistleblowers and scrutinises regulatory bodies like the CQC. Alexander’s Excavations – Mostly whistleblowing, NHS underbelly but other stuff too!
5. Dr. Chris Day: A junior doctor who raised concerns about dangerous understaffing in an intensive care unit in a London hospital. His case gained prominence due to his long legal battle challenging the structure of junior doctor contracts and seeking protection against detriment after whistleblowing, arguing that Health Education England (HEE) was not legally considered his employer for whistleblowing protection purposes.
6. Dr. Kim Holt: A consultant paediatrician who, along with colleagues, raised concerns about staffing and clinical standards at a clinic in Haringey run by Dr. Sabah Al-Zayyat, who saw Baby Peter Connelly shortly before his death. Dr. Holt faced significant difficulties after raising her concerns.
7. Dr. Raj Mattu: A consultant cardiologist at Walsgrave Hospital, Coventry. He publicly raised concerns in the early 2000s about patient safety risks due to overcrowding and potentially unsafe practices (like placing five patients in bays meant for four). He faced a very lengthy suspension and eventual dismissal, highlighting the personal cost often associated with whistleblowing.
8. Nurses and Families involved in the Gosport War Memorial Hospital case: While Dr. Jane Barton was the doctor investigated, numerous nurses had raised concerns internally over many years about the excessive use of opioid painkillers at the hospital. Families of deceased patients, such as Bridget Reeves, became crucial campaigners pushing for answers. The subsequent Gosport Independent Panel report confirmed that hundreds of patients had their lives shortened, validating earlier whistleblower concerns.
What is not well known by heath service folk and the general public is how whilstleblowers’ lives and health have been destroyed
History has shown that whistleblowers are relatively a small proportion of all UK whistleblowers. AI searches finds only one! What does that mean? It means that people in mental health services are ‘smarter’. They’re not gonna risk their necks based on some altruistic moral imperative. Don’t be fooled - they are not cowards. They all know that the system is set up to hang whistleblowers out to dry.
But wait… there is a new concept, not yet on blogs and websites. What’s that? It’s called ‘the pre-whistleblower’!! That’s when organisations give certain people who might blow the whistle a hard time and get them ‘out’, on legal grounds of pre-SOSR (‘Some Other Substantial Reason’) - a big topic - but not well known by those outside of employment law circles. I could go on for days, so I’ll stop here.
Although an older article it might still be of interest - Private Eye Online | Shoot The Messenger (direct link to pdf, shoot-the-messenger.pdf).
I’m really glad I asked the question now, this discussion has been very illuminating! I have ordered one of the Peter Duffy books as it looks interesting.
That’s one hell of a scoop. If anyone wants to blow the whistle, then don’t read it. Why? You may discover serious dangers - and then not blow the whistle. The Special Report is grim reading.
It’s an excellent read. I went through most of it. But… but… it’s not for everybody. Instagram must be more fun and less nauseating perhaps. Look, why do social media platforms even exist? Easy: to keep everybody distracted. If you don’t know what’s what, you just carry on merrily. Innit?
This is a Law & Practice forum. So what has whistleblowing to do with anything? It has everything to do with it! ‘Some’ people want to do what’s right and according to law. But then there are some other people who want the job to be done according to their personal whims. Those types - from my long observations - operate in packs. Yeah - like wolves. And when you read ‘Shoot the Messenger’ you see exactly the pack of wolves mentality.
Not everybody has time to read such a long article. I had AI summarise the key themes for those who are too busy:
Who is allowing all that to happen? Well I can tell you but not in open forum, and some wouldn’t like my answer. I’m not going to Diego Garcia! 
I have two of his books. I take um in ‘small doses’ because it is so nauseating and sad to read what happened. And where were your masters when all that was going on?
And what happens when no one blows the whistle or the whistle is heard by deaf ears? Ahhh… to find out you just need to study every major debacle in the NHS!!
The latest scoop is that CUH chief executive Roland Sinker has stated that “almost 700 patients who have undergone planned surgical procedures during the time the surgeon has been employed by CUH…" Further update on paediatric orthopaedic surgery | CUH
But wait - all this had been emerging from 2015! Chrysst - that’s approximately 10 years! [Expletives self-censored]. And that’s a theme that repeats in many NHS debacles. Don’t start me up on the case of Paterson Ian Paterson: Claims Against the Criminal Breast Surgeon
This would be the analogous hypothetical scenario in psychiatry (to CUH situation):
A psychiatrist at a prominent mental health trust faced scrutiny after an initial review found that a hundreds of patients received inappropriate or harmful treatments over a 10 year period. This allegedly was about prescribing medications without proper diagnostics, failure to assessing risks, failing to provide adequate therapy or follow-up care, or not recognising signs of deterioration in patients with severe conditions like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.
Following a preliminary review, the Trust expanded the review to hundreds of patients treated by the psychiatrist over the last 10 years -in collaboration with other Trusts. Patients reported distressing experiences, such as prolonged suffering due to misdiagnoses or being placed on medications that caused severe side effects without monitoring. Commonly it was found that a significant proportion of patients were on cocktails of 5 medications that were unexplained due to the absence of treatment plans. There was no evidence that patients gave valid consent to such combinations of medications.
As part of the investigation, the trust appointed external experts, including senior psychiatrists and legal advisors, to assess whether care standards were breached. Meanwhile, the psychiatrist was suspended, and the trust communicated transparently with patients and families, offering support and revised treatment plans where needed. The review aimed to uncover systemic issues and implement measures to prevent similar occurrences in the future.
It just ain’t happening. Nobody will be gonna whistleblow that sort of thing in psychiatry.
If I am right then it means that psychiatry is a very safe field to specialise in. In terms of diagnosis and treatment, ‘you’ could do whatever you like so long as no one ends up dead, or with the odd kidney failure due to lithium mismanagement.
Or it could mean that psychiatrist in the UK are practicing medicine to much higher standards that surgeons. [Caution: I am well aware that psychiatry is not surgery or vice versa - the point is that all medical practice is ruled by very generic standards at the GMC].
Arguments and rebuttals invited from anyone.
It is a very interesting book, albeit undeniably uncomfortable to read.
I read that Peter Duffy, a consultant urologist, decided to retire several years earlier than originally planned and intended to remove his from the medical register.
He was awarded an MBE for his services to the Isle of Man hospital during the Covid-19 pandemic.