Does rule through regulatory systems give protection from murderers? – No

by Julia Evans on November 6, 2009

From:             Julia Evans

Subject:         Does rule through systems give protection from murderers? – No

Date: 6 November 2009 16:52:23 GMT

To:      regx2 Reading only

re:  American Army Psychiatrist

(see here  Army psychiatrist shot after 13 killed in Fort Hood rampage : 6 November 2009: The army psychiatrist Major Nidal Malik Hasan is in hospital after allegedly shooting dead 13 people and wounding 30 when he went on a rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, the largest US military base in the world guardian.co.uk, Friday 6 November 2009 09.18 GMT )  :

There were more signs than with Dr Shipman that this man was a risk – so why did it happen?

With Dr Shipman colleagues trusted him – he was a very good doctor.  This relationship of trust blinded them to what were actually the motives behind his actions.  Read Dame Janet Smith – I think section 5. [i] The Army psychiatrist gave much more information about what was actually going on.  Why did not somebody add it all up?  See article below on accountability. (Now posted to LW here

More on the effects of using this government’s top-down power – Systems used to blame not re-calibrate and prevent (Child care) & the principles underlying Government action by Julia Evans on November 5, 2009 or here

If you drive accountability (or evaluation) through at level 1, there will be 2 main unintended results:

1)  the system can only ‘see’ that which it is programmed to see – so the operators give up their subjectivity and capacity to think.  They are cogs in a production system which transforms a bunch of symptoms (NICE ) via an evidence evaluated process (NICE ‘s clinical decision & S4H – Skills for Health /HPC ‘s competences usually with accountant’s help) into the Government defined standard human being.  The practitioners do not need to use their humanness to make 2 plus 2 equal 4.

2)  The system will stuff the blame into the fallible (a characteristic of being human) practitioner.  (See LW post here)

Now Level 2 system has a feedback loop as below.

A Level 3 system has a third party evaluator (this is probably too sophisticated for this government)

and a level 4 system you start getting into uncertainty and ethics and codes of practice.

Tragically, the Army psychiatrist is not a surprise to me.  If you stop people using their nous and prevent them from criticising systems and stop them retuning systems/procedures/codes of practice as circumstances change, then there will be radical system failure.

No systems of rules/competences/ etc can produce certainty/no risk/etc.  We are human-BEINGS not humanoids to be treated as cogs in the government’s machinery.

Rant over – am going out to friends.  Have a good weekend.

Julia


[i] Dame Janet Smith The Shipman Enquiry Reports: Available here : especially section 5.

FIRST REPORT

Death Disguised          published 19 July 2002

In the Inquiry’s First Report, the Chairman, Dame Janet Smith DBE, considered how many patients Shipman killed, the means employed and the period over which the killings took place.

SECOND REPORT

The Police Investigation of March 1998 :  published 14 July 2003 : Command Paper Cm 5853

In the Inquiry’s Second Report, the Chairman, Dame Janet Smith DBE, examined the conduct of the police investigation into Shipman that took place in March 1998 and failed to uncover his crimes.

THIRD REPORT

Death Certification and the Investigation of Deaths by Coroners : published 14 July 2003 : Command Paper Cm 5854

In the Inquiry’s Third Report, the Chairman, Dame Janet Smith DBE, considered the present system for death and cremation certification and for the investigation of deaths by coroners, together with the conduct of those who had operated those systems in the aftermath of the deaths of Shipman’s victims. She has made recommendations for change based on her findings.

FOURTH REPORT

The Regulation of Controlled Drugs in the Community : published 15 July 2004 : Command Paper Cm 6249

In the Inquiry’s Fourth Report, the Chairman, Dame Janet Smith DBE, considered the systems for the management and regulation of controlled drugs, together with the conduct of those who operated those systems. She has made recommendations for change based upon her findings.

FIFTH REPORT

Safeguarding Patients: Lessons from the Past – Proposals for the Future : published 9 December 2004 : Command Paper Cm 6394

In the Inquiry’s Fifth Report, the Chairman, Dame Janet Smith DBE, considered the handling of complaints against general practitioners (GPs), the raising of concerns about GPs, General Medical Council procedures and its proposal for revalidation of doctors. She has made recommendations for change based upon her findings.

SIXTH REPORT

Shipman: The Final Report    published 27 January 2005

In the Inquiry’s Sixth and final Report, the Chairman, Dame Janet Smith DBE considered how many patients Shipman killed during his career as a junior doctor at Pontefract General Infirmary between 1970 and 1974. She also considered a small number of cases from Shipman’s time in Hyde, which the Inquiry became aware of after the publication of the First Report. She also considered the claims by a former inmate at HMP Preston regarding alleged claims by Shipman about the number of patients he had killed.

Related posts

Is there a Complex Adaptive Systems approach behind the ‘Big Society’ and the Coalition Government’s attitude towards statutory professional regulation? by Jo Rostron on November 3, 2012 or here http://www.lacanianworks.net/?p=615

Texts from Julia Evans, from the archives, which give some of the background:

Psychotherapy is imposed: Psycho-analysis© works: Psychoanalysis operates by Julia Evans on December 15, 2010 or here http://www.lacanianworks.net/?p=226

More on the effects of using this government’s top-down power – Systems used to blame not re-calibrate and prevent (Child care) & the principles underlying Government action by Julia Evans on November 5, 2009 or here http://www.lacanianworks.net/?p=616