Investigation into Whistleblowing Doctor Finally Dropped

A doctor sacked by Croydon University Hospital has had an investigation into his alleged gross misconduct dropped by the General Medical Council. Dr Kevin Beatt, a consultant cardiologist, was dismissed from his role in September 2012.

Dr Beatt, 63, attended an employment tribunal in October 2014 where he was exonerated of any wrongdoing under a ruling that concluded he has been unfairly dismissed by the hospital following his decision to speak out about safety concerns regarding a patient’s death during a routine operation in 2011.

Dr Beatt voiced his apprehension over the hospital’s efficiency in a conversation with a coroner before subsequently finding himself referred to the General Medical Council (GMC) by Croydon Health Services; the trust responsible for running the hospital.

The GMC continued to investigate him even after he was exonerated by the tribunal last October. However, Dr Beatt has now been told he will face no further action, although he will still need to face a Care Quality Commission (CQC) probe.

A delighted Dr Beatt has welcomed the end of the investigation against him: “I’m pleased the GMC has stopped its investigation but I have received no explanation as to why it took so long to make the decision…The letter I received didn’t include any details of their investigation; it just quoted the employment tribunal’s findings. They could have done that months ago.

The investigation into Dr Beatt began two years ago and has included interviews with up to 24 witnesses, many of whom were not interviewed until after the tribunal’s ruling last year.

The death of Gerald Storey

In June 2011, patient Gerald Storey died during a routine angioplasty that Dr Beatt was conducting. Dr Beatt claims that the tragedy was caused by the hospital’s decision to suspend a nurse who should have taken the lead in the procedure, leaving him without capable assistance for the operation.

This assertion is supported by Croydon senior coroner Dr Roy Palmer, who claims the nature of the suspension contradicts the legislation advocated by Rule 43 of the Coroners Rules.

Detriment due to Whistleblowing?

Dr Beatt’s legal team has claimed that by investigating their client, Croydon Health Services were seeking to punish Dr Beatt for revealing the hospital’s errors. If so, Dr Beatt’s case is a prime example of detriment as a result of whistleblowing.

There were also claims from Dr Beatt’s lawyers that Croydon Health Services had pressurised other members of staff into refusing to support Dr Beatta’s case for fear of damaging their own livelihoods; thereby weakening the doctor’s reputation and the reliability of his case.

Speaking about the case, Dr Beatt has criticised the GMC’s decision not to support his counter claims of unfair treatment, despite the tribunal ruling in his favour: “The employment tribunal pretty much states it is a vexatious referral in that it came after they were exposed at the coroner’s court […] They might also seek to investigate those individuals who made the referral but they simply state they won’t take my case any further.”

The GMC has declined to comment on their policy regarding Dr Beatt’s case. It is not clear whether their decision to decline further investigation is influenced by Croydon Health Services’ intention to appeal the tribunal verdict.

The Croydon Health Services trust has already spent upward of £130,000 on the case, and a spokesman for the trust has stated that “legal proceedings are still ongoing and we are continuing to pursue the appeal.”