http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7353/1539/a
| Home | Help | Search/Archive | Feedback | Table of Contents |
|
|||||||||
 Collections under
which this article appears: Adolescents
Medicine
and the law (incl forensic medicine) Professional
conduct and regulation Musculoskeletal
syndromes (including chronic fatigue and Gulf war syndromes)
|
Clare Dyer
A consultant paediatrician who disagreed with the parents of a 12 year old girl with chronic fatigue syndrome about how she should be treated obtained confidential medical information about her without her parents' consent, the General Medical Council heard this week.
The girl's parents told Dr Christopher Cheetham that they no longer wanted him to be involved in her care after a disagreement over her treatment, said David Perry, the GMC's counsel.
But despite assurances from Dr Cheetham and managers of South Buckinghamshire NHS Trust that the parents' wishes would be respected, he continued to interfere, even making implicit suggestions that she might be experiencing parental emotional abuse.
The girl, now aged 17, was confined to bed for two years and used incontinence pads some of the time. Social services convened two child protection case conferences but decided she was not at risk.
Opening the case against Dr Cheetham, aged 64, who denies serious professional misconduct, Mr Perry said the case was about the right of a patient to choose a course of treatment and to have that decision respected. "This is about unjustified interference in a patient's affairs."
In June 1997, when the girl, A, had been confined to bed for three weeks, Dr Cheetham, consultant paediatrician at Wycombe General Hospital, spent 10 minutes examining her and recommended an inpatient programme of psychotherapy and physiotherapy.
Her parents, Mr and Mrs B, strongly disagreed, believing her illness was organic. They wrote to Dr Cheetham telling him they did not want him to be involved in their daughter's care.
Mr Perry said they were within their rights to do so. "They are entitled to hold their views and not be dictated to by the medical profession." Mr Perry said Dr Cheetham seemed to believe that "as a consultant paediatrician he had a duty to Ms A that transcended the wishes of her parents."
But the parents had a right to decline treatment for her and to decline his help. The family's GP called in Dr Nigel Speight, a consultant paediatrician from Durham with a special interest in chronic fatigue syndrome. He examined A for an hour and agreed with Mr and Mrs B that their daughter should be treated at home under the care of her GP.
Dr Cheetham continued to insist in letters to Dr Speight and others that Ms A was being deprived of proper treatment and her development was being impaired.
Mr Perry said Dr Cheetham accessed A's medical records and asked for the results of blood tests carried out on her. Dr Cheetham and a child psychiatrist sought to involve social services and have A judged to be at risk so that "her parents could no longer have control over her medical destiny."
Dr Cheetham denies trying to influence A's clinical management without consent, gaining access to confidential information, and making inaccurate assertions about the case.
|
|
|||||||||
|
Collections under
which this article appears:Adolescents
Medicine
and the law (incl forensic medicine) Professional
conduct and regulation Musculoskeletal
syndromes (including chronic fatigue and Gulf war syndromes)
|
Read all Rapid Responses
| Home | Help | Search/Archive | Feedback | Table of Contents |
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
