|
GP Jayne Donegan -Not Guilty
GP Jayne Donegan - cleared of any professional misconduct but how many people are aware of this?
Dr Jayne Donegan, was accused by a judge as ‘peddling junk science’ when she gave evidence for two mothers. They were both fighting attempts by their former partners to have their children given childhood immunisations. The mothers felt that the childhood vaccinations were unnecessary and possibly dangerous.
Dr Donegan, a GP and a homeopath with more than 20 years' experience in practise, was accused by the GMC of failing in her duty to the court by giving selective evidence.
She was accused of Serious Professional Misconduct.
In the both unrelated cases, the fathers of two girls, then aged 10 and four, sought orders that they should have the whole range of childhood immunisations against the wishes of their ex-partners. Dr Donegan was called by the two mothers to be an expert witness, as their daughters had received none of the vaccinations routinely given to children, including jabs against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR), diphtheria, tetanus, meningitis and polio. The mothers unfortunately lost in the high court in 2003 and their appeal was thrown out later that year.
According to Lord Justice Sedley, one of the three appeal court judges: "Dr Donegan's report was based he felt on no independent research and she presented the court with little more than ‘junk science.
In his judgment ordering that the girls had to be vaccinated, Mr Justice Sumner said: "I am compelled to the reluctant conclusion that in this case Dr Donegan has allowed her deeply held feelings on the subject of immunisation to overrule the duty she owes to the court."
GMC CASE
On the 24th August 2007 the GMC cleared Dr Jayne Donegan of Serious Professional Misconduct.
The panel said that they were sure that at no stage did she allow any views that she held to overrule her duty to the court and to the litigants, adding that they were sure that in the reports she provided she did not fail to be objective, independent and unbiased.
However despite this, excellent win very little has been heard about her case after it went to the hearing.
At the beginning of the hearing the Daily Mail had this to say
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/
healthmain.html?in_article_id=473847&in_page_id=1774
GP accused of misleading court over MMR danger
Last updated at 21:22pm on 7th August 2007
Dr Jayne Donegan 'convinced herself' of the dangers of MMR vaccines
A GP misled a court by claiming vaccines including MMR jab were too dangerous to be given to children, the General Medical Council heard yesterday.
Dr Jayne Donegan, a GP in Herne Hill, south London, "convinced herself" of the dangers of vaccines to such an extent that she was prepared to give false evidence, it was alleged.
At the end of a case in which the mothers of two children opposed a bid by the fathers to have them vaccinated, the judge described the evidence she gave as "junk science".
Dr Donegan had submitted two reports as an expert witness and gave evidence backing the mothers' opposition to the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and other childhood immunisations. These included whooping cough, polio and tetanus.
But she is alleged to have quoted selectively from medical reports and left out those parts which supported the use of the vaccine.
Dr Donegan, who works in Herne Hill, south London, appeared yesterday at the start of a two-week hearing before the GMC's Fitness to Practise Panel in Manchester.
She is accused of acting unprofessionally and also of bringing the profession into disrepute.
Tom Kark, for the GMC, told the hearing the GP failed in her duty to present a balanced report.
"Dr Donegan was giving a misleading impression in court," he added.
He said the GP had allowed her own two daughters to be given the vaccines before she later became convinced they were risky and unnecessary and could do more harm than good.
It was in 2002 that she appeared as an expert witness at Winchester Crown Court in the case involving two girls, aged four and ten.
Another consultant was "scathing" about her report and Mr Justice Sumner ruled in the fathers' favour.The mothers then went to the Court of Appeal where their case was dismissed again after Lord Justice Sedley accused Dr Donegan of presenting "junk science".
It was following his complaint that the GMC began proceedings against the GP.
The hearing continues.
Share this article:
The Daily Mail however failed to follow this up with the results of the Hearing. I spoke to the ‘Daily Mail’ today who said they were unaware of the outcome of Dr Donegan’s case. I personally feel if she had lost her case they would have been only too pleased to have followed up their rather critical article above.
August 24 2007 - Statement from Dr Jayne L M Donegan, who was today cleared of serious professional misconduct by the General Medical Council.
" I have always maintained that the court evidence I gave was based on objective, independent and unbiased research and I'm pleased that this has been recognised by today's verdict."
"This has been a very distressing time for me and my family and I would like to thank those who have supported me throughout, and to the legal team assembled by the Medical Defence Union and led by Ian Stern QC."
"I am looking forward to continuing my work, offering my patients the best care I possibly can."
The GMC had this to say in their findings.
GMC Panel Findings - August 24th 2007 |
|
"The Panel were sure that at no stage did you allow any views that you held to overrule your duty to the court and to the litigants."
"You demonstrated to the Panel that your reports did not derive from your deeply held views and your evidence supported this. You explained to the Panel that your approach in your report was to provide the court with a alternative view based on the material you produced in your references. That material was largely drawn from publications that were in fact in favour of immunisation.
It was clear from your evidence and the evidence of your witness that your aim is to direct parents to sources of information about immunisation and child health safety to help them to make informed choices.
You told us that there are many books by doctors and others in this and other countries who seriously question vaccination and they cite a lot of history, proofs and medical papers to support their arguments. You did not use any of those publications because you did not think that the Court would regard those as satisfactory support or references for your recommendations. You largely used what was available in refereed medical journals."
"the Panel is sure that in the reports you provided you did not fail to be objective, independent and unbiased."
"Accordingly, the Panel found that you are not guilty of serious professional misconduct."
These Transcripts have been supplied by Dr Jayne Donegan.
Dr Jayne Donegan has had only one small piece on the UK Press Association which sadly has now been removed.
Taken from MDU Site
Doctors for doctors
The ethos of a "doctors for doctors" mutual is as strong as ever.
Our Board and Executive is led by doctors and our Cases Committee, which reviews the conduct of individual cases, is made up of some of the most eminent members of the profession in the UK and Ireland.
Many of our staff have been in clinical practice and have faced the dilemmas and day-to-day problems enabling them to understand and identify with our members' concerns and issues.
The Medical Defense Union have told Dr Donegan that she is allowed no Media coverage by way of STRONG ADVICE after she was cleared of 'serious professional misconduct' by the GMC. When she asked why, they stated,' it was usual in controversial cases like hers'.
When the GMC decided to investigate Dr Jayne Donegan for 'Serious Professional Misconduct' they were only too happy for press releases to be released before her case that vilified her. These go back to as early as 2003.. The term 'Peddling Junk Science' was happily branded around by the media reducing the respected GP and Homeopath to a 'quack' status.
However after 13 days of stringent investigation by the GMC and a glowing panel report,the MDU despite claims on their website that they are 'doctors for doctors' strongly advise against this particular doctor from declaring her professionalism as unsullied.
One wonders how many other professionals who use alternative therapies are treated in this way and also do not get the media coverage they deserve?
Strangely there is also no mention of her victory on the GMC website only a record of her hearing. This is misleading to both the General Public and to anyone who may wish to employ this doctor.
This is outrageous as the public have the right to know how Dr Donegans case went. It is unfair to Dr Donegan as the publicity before the case was extensive and over many years.
She was found ‘Not Guilty’ of serious professional misconduct and she should be allowed to have the publicity she deserves.
|
|
|
