Networked Knowledge - Media Report

[This edited version of the report has been prepared by Dr Robert N Moles]

Professor Meadow homepage
Articles homepage
List of Australian, UK and USA miscarriage of justice law reports
Article: Australian law on miscarriages of justice
Article: UK law on miscarriages of justice
Article: USA law on miscarriages of justice

On 2 March 2006 Nigel Hawkes of The Times (London) reported that the General Medical Council was to challenge the recent High Court ruling in the Meadow case.

Hawkes said that The GMC had said that it was not seeking to reinstate its decision to have the paediatrician struck off the Register for the evidence he gave in the Sally Clark murder trial. But it was concerned over its role in protecting the public interest. Justice Collins had concluded that expert witnesses such as Professor Meadow should be immune from disciplinary proceedings unless referred to the Professional Conduct Body by a trial judge.

The judge had said that the paediatrician had made one mistake, which was to misunderstand and misinterpret the statistics. He also gave warning that the GMC's Findings had increased the reluctance of medical practitioners to involve themselves in court proceedings.

Hawkes reported Finlay Scott, Chief Executive of the GMC, said: We wholly agree with Mr Justice Collins that there is a real problem to be solved. It cannot be in the public interest if doctors are deterred from giving evidence, honestly and truthfully, and within their competence.

However, we do not believe that the solution lies in extending the principle of immunity, in a wholly novel way, thereby placing doctors and other professionals beyond the reach of their regulator.

We do not accept that we should be prevented from acting in the public interest when we judge that to be necessary.

Source: Nigel Hawkes The Times March 02, 2006

Top of Page