# Surgeon who branded his initials on patients' livers told he can keep working



## Northerner (Jun 14, 2021)

A surgeon who branded his own initials on to unaware patients' new liver transplants has been told he can continue working within the field.

Simon Bramhall admitted to using an argon beam machine to label his initials on the organs of unconscious patients on the operating table in 2013, according to Birmingham Live.

Bramhall, who worked at Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, was ordered by Birmingham Crown Court to complete 120 hours of unpaid work and was fined £10,000.

His registration was temporarily suspended in December 2020, however, a review on June 4 found him still fit to practice as a medical professional.









						Surgeon who branded his initials on patients' livers told he can keep working
					

Simon Bramhall admitted to using an argon beam machine to label his initials on the organs of unconscious patients on the operating table in 2013.




					www.dailyrecord.co.uk


----------



## pm133 (Jun 14, 2021)

That is astounding!!! 
Both that he thought this was OK and then to be allowed to continue operating.


----------



## rebrascora (Jun 14, 2021)

Personally I don't have a problem with it assuming it is merely cosmetic and not harmful. These people are very high functioning and there will be an element of artistic genius in their skill so I can understand him wanting to sign his work in some way. I would imagine quite a few of his colleagues were aware of what he was doing as the theatre will have a significant number of people assisting in such an operation. I guess someone blew the whistle on him.... unless it was picked up on a later scan. 
There has to be an element of pride and vanity in it but if he was saving my life I wouldn't begrudge him signing off his masterpiece and I am assuming he would only initial it if he was happy with his work so I might even be happy to have his initials on my liver. Yes, ethically it is wrong, but when you are operating in life and death situations I imagine there is a fine line as to how you cope with the implications of that. 
I would certainly hate for someone with his skill to be struck off and that investment in his training and skill wasted when it could be used saving other people's lives.


----------



## Inka (Jun 14, 2021)

I’m struggling to respond without a swearing acronym. The degree of narcissism and arrogance involved is shocking. Why would that even occur to a surgeon to do during/after a complex operation? I find it utterly vile. It’s a gross abuse of trust.

The article says it was discovered when one patient had to be operated on again by a different surgeon, so the initials presumably weren’t visible any other way? That makes it even more creepy IMO.


----------



## Ljc (Jun 14, 2021)

Tbh if this had happened to me ,  personally I would have only been worried if it was detrimental to my liver but it does seem rather odd that he would do such a thing.


----------



## rebrascora (Jun 14, 2021)

I find it surprising that people find it surprising that it happened. 
Yes it is fundamentally "wrong" but these people are playing God to a large extent on a daily basis, trying to save peoples lives and I imagine the loss rate will be higher than most other surgery. They have to be hugely confident in their own abilities and judgement because they couldn't do it if they weren't. Arrogance will easily follow on from being overly confident. There will most likely be banter going on during the surgery just to lighten the tension and I could see how it could easily lead o from that. Why would it be any different that a top surgeon might want to "tag" his work than say a graffiti artist. When my Dad and I finished building my house I felt that same urge for us to leave something in the fabric of the building, identifying us. It is a human instinct I believe to want to "claim" something you are proud of having created or achieved. 
I think his punishment of unpaid work and a fine was probably appropriate in view of the ethical breach but it certainly doesn't shock or offend me and I think it would be unthinkable to strike him off. This is not like a top athlete taking drugs. This man saves lives on a daily basis. To stop him doing that just punishes his patients.


----------



## Northerner (Jun 14, 2021)

Inka said:


> I’m struggling to respond without a swearing acronym. The degree of narcissism and arrogance involved is shocking. Why would that even occur to a surgeon to do during/after a complex operation? I find it utterly vile. It’s a gross abuse of trust.
> 
> The article says it was discovered when one patient had to be operated on again by a different surgeon, so the initials presumably weren’t visible any other way? That makes it even more creepy IMO.


Yup, pretty much what I thought too  It's unnecessary, and surely when you are performing life-saving surgery nothing unnecessary should be happening!   You can be proud of your work in knowing the person is alive and well, not the knowledge that you have secretly graffitied them


----------



## Inka (Jun 14, 2021)

I see what you’re saying @rebrascora but in the case of your house you’re marking a) an inanimate object not a person, and b) something that is yours. I don’t think they’re comparable. The surgeon will already have got his ‘mark’ on the patient’s medical records as his name will be recorded there, and, if a good surgeon, his work will speak for itself and his reputation will be built on that. Now he’s damaged his reputation for what?

I can think of other ‘marks’ that I would say it’s closer to. I don’t know if he gave an explanation or any clue to why he did it, so we probably won’t know.


----------



## ToughButtercup (Jun 14, 2021)

His 'cards' if not his liver have been marked I suspect. One more strike and he'll be out I should imagine. 
If we find out he's done it again,  or does something similar,  then he should be shown the door.


----------



## rebrascora (Jun 14, 2021)

Most graffiti artists including Banksy do not own the properties they "embellish" 

I should say that I totally agree what he did was wrong, but I can just imagine how that sort of mentality happens in that line of work and i don't personally find it offensive nor would I be overly upset if he had done it to me.... provided the work he did was good and saved my life and it was not detrimental to the function of the liver.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 14, 2021)

I can't believe this man isn't facing jail time.
But what I find most astonishing at all is people defending him.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 14, 2021)

Inka said:


> I’m struggling to respond without a swearing acronym. The degree of narcissism and arrogance involved is shocking. Why would that even occur to a surgeon to do during/after a complex operation? I find it utterly vile. It’s a gross abuse of trust.
> 
> The article says it was discovered when one patient had to be operated on again by a different surgeon, so the initials presumably weren’t visible any other way? That makes it even more creepy IMO.


I guess at least the new surgeon knew it was his work!

The fundamental point is - the guy has messed up, yes badly, but he has been through due process of his peers and will be monitored closely in the future. The NHS is desperately short of world class surgeons which he sounds like he is. If he goes on to save 10,000 people over the remainder of his career without incident, I think I can forgive one massive mistake, especially if one of those lives he saves is mine and the risk of what he did to the patient was negligible.

But I guess the overarching concern is -  are the patients he embellished ok with it - if they forgive him, that's all that matters. If they don't, then he should probably not practice anymore out of respect to them.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 14, 2021)

BlueArmy said:


> I guess at least the new surgeons knew it was his work!
> 
> I guess the fundamental point is - the guy has messed up, yes badly, but in has been through due process of his peers and will be monitored closely in the future. The NHS is desperately short of world class surgeons which he sounds like he is. If he goes on to save 10,000 people over the remainder of his career without incident, I think I can forgive one massive mistake, especially if one of those lives he saves is mine.


And what if his unnecessary scarring had caused an infection which killed a close family member of yours?


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 14, 2021)

then he would be in prison serving life for murder and i'd have a different opinion on it. The same if it wasn't one of my family members, but I am assuming he knew the action he took would result in no risk of infection. I would imagine burning tissue prevents infection to be honest.

It was a stupid mistake, I am not defending his actions. Merely making the point that he has a opportunity to make good his wrong several times over with a skill that is rare in the NHS and take a long time to obtain, if ever.


----------



## Inka (Jun 14, 2021)

@BlueArmy I would hope world class surgeons don’t stamp their mark on unconscious and non-consenting patients.  It’s a gross breach of trust. It wasn’t just a one-off mistake, he did it twice. It’s the fact he either didn’t think there was anything wrong with it, or, knew it was wrong but got a kick out of doing it anyway, that disturbs me.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 14, 2021)

I'm not defending his actions, I agree it was disturbing. I am however, defending the position of the medical regulator to allow him to continue practicing.


----------



## nonethewiser (Jun 14, 2021)

Highly intelligent man, why would he behave that way, makes no sense.

What he has done is disgraceful really, no patient consent & initials served no purpose medically, just his own gratification. All said pleased he's not struck off & unpaid work will give him time to reflect on his behaviour, sadly clever guy who lacks common sense.


----------



## Inka (Jun 14, 2021)

rebrascora said:


> Most graffiti artists including Banksy do not own the properties they "embellish"
> 
> I should say that I totally agree what he did was wrong, but I can just imagine how that sort of mentality happens in that line of work and i don't personally find it offensive nor would I be overly upset if he had done it to me.... provided the work he did was good and saved my life and it was not detrimental to the function of the liver.



Sorry, I missed your reply above. Banksy is treated as a special case, but graffiti in general is an eyesore and a crime:

_“In England and Wales, graffiti is considered an act of criminal damage under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 and offenders can be punished with an unlimited fine.
In Scotland, graffiti is treated as an act of vandalism, and prosecuted under the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995. The maximum fine is £10,000. A prison sentence of up to 3 months is also possible for a first offence, and of up to 6 months for any further offence.”_

I simply *don’t* understand his motivation - why would anyone want to ‘mark’ another human being with their initials? It wouldn’t occur to me in a million years. It’s gross and reminiscent of abhorrent practices.

The fact he was blinded by his own arrogance is shocking. The idea that he thought it was ok is very hard to believe. In my opinion, the most likely thing is that he got a kick out of doing it and thought no-one would ever find out. I wouldn’t want someone with that psychology operating on me personally.


----------



## travellor (Jun 15, 2021)

Once you start to see your patients, or indeed any person, as a blank canvas to use as you feel fit, it's probably not the sort of sociopath I would like to have cutting into my body.
Those that justify that possibly need to consider exactly were they would draw the line if they were being used as artwork.
Hannibal Lector always made a splash.


----------



## ToughButtercup (Jun 15, 2021)

pm133 said:


> I can't believe this man isn't facing jail time.
> But what I find most astonishing at all is people defending him.



I suspect the defence offered is based on an acute sense of our own fallibility.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jun 15, 2021)

All else being equal I'd prefer that my innards not be used as a graffiti wall by surgeons. They should continue to get their jollies from vivisecting baby ocelots or whatever it is they do for entertainment.

But I doubt that people surprised at a surgeon displaying breath-taking narcissm have actually met very many of them.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 15, 2021)

ToughButtercup said:


> I suspect the defence offered is based on an acute sense of our own fallibility.


To err is human and no one is perfect.

Although to inscribe your initials
on anothers internal organs is egotistical at best and psychotic as worse as discussed.

My point is and always was - he has been through criminal and professional proceedings and judged by our peers and his. 

He has been punished and assessed as low risk of doing it again. Regardless of our distain for what he did, ending a brilliant career and starving patients from his rare lifesaving skill is a pretty harsh punishment and its possible
to forgive but not forget.


----------



## travellor (Jun 15, 2021)

BlueArmy said:


> To err is human and no one is perfect.
> 
> Although to inscribe your initials
> on anothers internal organs is egotistical at best and psychotic as worse as discussed.
> ...


What if he was a mediocre surgeon?
Or if he was a bad one?


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 15, 2021)

you’d hope the medical regulators would undertake a benefit/risk assessment as part of their review. If he was average and has little to offer in terms of saving lives, developing others etc, contributing knowledge - you’d hope that factored into their decision making as to if you allow him to continue. Some juice isn’t worth the effort of the squeeze - and if the risk outweighs the benefit - then they should draw a line under it and move on.


----------



## rebrascora (Jun 15, 2021)

I would imagine, to be in a situation where he is doing transplant ops, would suggest that he is at the top of his game anyway, and most likely leading a team since I find it hard to imagine a more junior surgeon would have the arrogance or opportunity to monogram someone's liver. I also think it highly likely that his team were aware of what he did and didn't report him, if this only came to light later, which suggests he is probably well respected by his peers, even if his judgment on ethics is amiss. I wonder that he has only done it twice.


----------



## travellor (Jun 15, 2021)

rebrascora said:


> I would imagine, to be in a situation where he is doing transplant ops, would suggest that he is at the top of his game anyway, and most likely leading a team since I find it hard to imagine a more junior surgeon would have the arrogance or opportunity to monogram someone's liver. I also think it highly likely that his team were aware of what he did and didn't report him, if this only came to light later, which suggests he is probably well respected by his peers, even if his judgment on ethics is amiss. I wonder that he has only done it twice.



"A nurse who saw the initialling questioned what had happened and Bramhall was said to have replied: "I do this."








						'Liver branding' surgeon Simon Bramhall fined £10,000
					

Simon Bramhall is fined for branding his initials on two patients' livers.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




It's more a case that the theatre nurse would lose their job.
Whistle blowers are punished in the NHS, it's a culture of fear.

It only came to light when a different surgeon removed the liver as it failed (for reasons not associated with the first surgeon) and reported the incident.
The other patient discovered is having physiological issues.

"Prosecutor Tony Badenoch QC said one of the two victims was left feeling "violated" and suffered ongoing psychological harm"

So, the surgeon also did direct harm to a patient.


----------



## Inka (Jun 15, 2021)

He was charged with two offences but it wasn’t denied that there might have been other offences.

I don’t think whether he’s a good/average/brilliant surgeon comes into it really. Surely we judge people on their actions not who they are or how good they are at their job? Either something is wrong to do or it’s not. If two surgeons had been doing this and only the mediocre one lost his job, then that would be wrong IMO.


----------



## travellor (Jun 15, 2021)

Inka said:


> He was charged with two offences but it wasn’t denied that there might have been other offences.
> 
> I don’t think whether he’s a good/average/brilliant surgeon comes into it really. Surely we judge people on their actions not who they are or how good they are at their job? Either something is wrong to do or it’s not. If two surgeons had been doing this and only the mediocre one lost his job, then that would be wrong IMO.



What comes next, 
A brilliant brain surgeon can tattoo his name on your scalp as the hair will grow back over it?


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 15, 2021)

travellor said:


> "A nurse who saw the initialling questioned what had happened and Bramhall was said to have replied: "I do this."
> 
> 
> 
> ...



then the medical regulator should take that into consideration. At the end of the day, he took an oath to do no harm, if there are repercussions medically from his actions then it moves from negligent to gross negligence I would say, then no matter how good he was the NHS is btter off without him. However, the regulator has the facts, the media are reporting their version of the facts as they understand them. I guess this is where faith has to step in around their robustness of their evaluations and processes.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 15, 2021)

Inka said:


> He was charged with two offences but it wasn’t denied that there might have been other offences.
> 
> I don’t think whether he’s a good/average/brilliant surgeon comes into it really. Surely we judge people on their actions not who they are or how good they are at their job? Either something is wrong to do or it’s not. If two surgeons had been doing this and only the mediocre one lost his job, then that would be wrong IMO.


life is rarely that binary though is it. Weather its right or wrong is of no debate, its wrong end of. But decisions must look at the issue in the round and assess all elements, including the benefits of keeping someone vs the risk of managing them based on poor behaviours is the point I am making, and with such a controversial decision I’d expect that was heavily scrutinised and debated by the regulator.


----------



## travellor (Jun 15, 2021)

BlueArmy said:


> life is rarely that binary though is it. Weather its right or wrong is of no debate, its wrong end of. But decisions must look at the issue in the round and assess all elements, including the benefits of keeping someone vs the risk of managing them based on poor behaviours is the point I am making, and with such a controversial decision I’d expect that was heavily scrutinised and debated by the regulator.


That's the funny old thing about life.
It seems to be the same people do the reviews, no matter who you are.
If you're a doctor, it's your peers, doctors magistrates, judges, all people from your walk of life.
If you're the hospital cleaner, it's still the doctors, magistrates, judges, just most likely in a different setting, such as a tribunal or court.
Maybe we need to mix it up then, let the cleaner make the review of the doctors, or put the cleaners, street sweepers, etc, in the magistrates courts to judge their peers?


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 15, 2021)

I’m astonished at how this has gotten to where it is. The liver is the only organ in the body to able to heal itself. Those initials won’t be there now, as he probably knows full well. It’s hardly a cosmetic issue, and how anyone could be horrified and feel violated by it is beyond my comprehension. If anyone did that to my new  liver, not that need one, I’d have a laugh.

And if you take all the badges off a Ferrari, it’s still a Ferrari and will work just the same. But you won’t, because of vanity. Artists sign their works not because of vanity, but pride because of their success at producing a masterpiece.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 15, 2021)

the whole thread is a little jumbled - the news article was in relation to him being allowed to practice again, not what he did. Not sure scarring will heal itself, if it did there would be no liver cirrhosis, but I’ll leave someone medically trained to discuss that one further! Although it has been a good discussion.


----------



## travellor (Jun 15, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> I’m astonished at how this has gotten to where it is. The liver is the only organ in the body to able to heal itself. Those initials won’t be there now, as he probably knows full well. It’s hardly a cosmetic issue, and how anyone could be horrified and feel violated by it is beyond my comprehension. If anyone did that to my new  liver, not that need one, I’d have a laugh.
> 
> And if you take all the badges off a Ferrari, it’s still a Ferrari and will work just the same. But you won’t, because of vanity. Artists sign their works not because of vanity, but pride because of their success at producing a masterpiece.


Argon beam?
You reckon if you cauterise skin with an argon beam, there won't be a scar?
Or it will heal.
So in theory, any procedure, internal or external, could be signed off, and there wouldn't be a blemish?
And there is absolutely no risk with an argon laser? 
Unnecessary cauterising procedures are acceptable?
Just signing off his work as an artist while he has the  laser in his hands anyway?


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 15, 2021)

If it heals then I think he lacked imagination - should of inscribed a recipe for liver and onions on it.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 16, 2021)

BlueArmy said:


> the whole thread is a little jumbled - the news article was in relation to him being allowed to practice again, not what he did. Not sure scarring will heal itself, if it did there would be no liver cirrhosis, but I’ll leave someone medically trained to discuss that one further! Although it has been a good discussion.


I am medically trained. Early liver cirrhosis can be reversed or halted if the cause (usually excess alcohol consumption) is removed. Surgery on the liver doesn’t cause any scar formation. And in this case, a bit of superficial cookery with an Argon laser won’t have the remotest effect on liver function. You could lose an entire lobe of your liver and still lead a healthy life without hindrance.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 16, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> I am medically trained. Early liver cirrhosis can be reversed or halted if the cause (usually excess alcohol consumption) is removed. Surgery on the liver doesn’t cause any scar formation. And in this case, a bit of superficial cookery with an Argon laser won’t have the remotest effect on liver function. You could lose an entire lobe of your liver and still lead a healthy life without hindrance.


There you go, he does lack imagination then!


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jun 16, 2021)

BlueArmy said:


> There you go, he does lack imagination then!


Absolutely. If he wasn't such a loser, he'd have been doing topiary with these people's tripes, not just a bit of graffiti.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 16, 2021)

Still struggling to get over the idea of equating what this guy did to Banksie's graffiti and defacing a Ferrari badge.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 16, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> I’m astonished at how this has gotten to where it is. The liver is the only organ in the body to able to heal itself. ce.


No it isn't. Skin is the single largest organ and within reason it will also heal itself
Are you _sure_ you are medically trained?


----------



## travellor (Jun 16, 2021)

pm133 said:


> No it isn't. Skin is the single largest organ and within reason it will also heal itself
> Are you _sure_ you are medically trained?


And sadly, this is also the best argument as to why any profession should never be allowed to self police.


----------



## trophywench (Jun 16, 2021)

All sorts of things I have read over the years written by medical experts who know far more than me about what internal organs can and can't do have told me that if you tear the liver apart jaggedly and so it has gaps in the join - the liver regenerates itself and just fills the gaps in itself.  Yours has failed so you need a transplant - I'm a match - so have half of mine, not all of it - and we can both manage with only half of one until each half regenerates the missing parts.  (I accept is it isn't quite as simple as that - but the skin can't do it anyway.)


----------



## rebrascora (Jun 17, 2021)

Inka said:


> Sorry, I missed your reply above. Banksy is treated as a special case, but graffiti in general is an eyesore and a crime:


Why should Banksy be a special case? Because he is at the top of his game and makes brilliant social comment or because people "*perceive" *his work to be valuable and therefore it enhances the value of the property he defaces? 

I would be furious if Banksy did his artwork on the side of my house, but like @mikeyB I could have a laugh with a surgeon who monogrammed a liver, which technically was not even mine until he installed it. 
I would love to have been a fly on the wall at the CPS deliberations where a judgement was made about charging him and how they applied the law in this case. It would have been interesting to hear all the legal points considered. I see he pleaded guilty to assault by "beating" but not ABH. 

It is fascinating how strongly many people feel about this and I wonder if it may reflect a combination of deep rooted cultural and perhaps political or even religious views. I consider myself to be a compassionate person, so it interests me that my view on this is so at odds with the majority of opinion here. 
I also wonder who did the most harm to the person who was traumatized by the information that this had been done to them. It was the knowledge which caused the psychological damage not the actual act and they never would have known if they hadn't been told, so the mental damage was in telling them. 
This sort of dilemma is interesting to think about albeit sad that someone is now struggling mentally as a result.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 17, 2021)

pm133 said:


> No it isn't. Skin is the single largest organ and within reason it will also heal itself
> Are you _sure_ you are medically trained?


B.Sc. (St Andrews) M.B. Ch.B. (Manchester), and skin heals with scarring, and therefore leaving a non- functional area. The liver doesn’t scar.


----------



## Inka (Jun 17, 2021)

i personally don’t think Banksy should be a special case, but he is because his graffiti makes money.

I’m not religious so religion plays no part in my view about this surgeon. It was a gross breach of trust and unprofessional. There’s also something very distasteful about branding your initials on another human being without their knowledge. It’s creepy and disturbing. I don’t see it at all as ‘signing an artwork’ - I see it as a mark of arrogance and a totally unnecessary act.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 17, 2021)

As the liver is hidden behind the ribs and under the diaphragm on the right side of the body, that is hardly “branding your initials on another human being”. It’s like the stonemasons who built our great cathedrals, they always left their personal mark where nobody could see it. Mind you, they were built to last for centuries. We aren’t.

Even a surgeon doing a total colon removal wouldn’t see the liver, because he might well be using his minions to hold a liver retractor to keep it away from potential injury. That’s a fate I narrowly escaped from when I first developed ulcerative colitis, because it involved the whole of the colon, but I was saved by steroids orally and via the south entrance, plus luck. Even if they did remove the colon, I wouldn’t care less if the surgeon stitched “Kilroy was here” on my linea alba.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jun 17, 2021)

I mainly think this is funny, but I also think it's bizarre that anybody wouldn't realise that a lot of people would find it really distressing, and that doing it is therefore a clear breach of do-no-harm principles. 

Of course what the patient thinks about it is the only thing which matters - that the surgeon, you or I don't find it a big deal is completely irrelevant.


----------



## Inka (Jun 17, 2021)

And some yobs graffiti cathedrals. I was going to say this surgeon was more like that, but actually there’s no comparison between a human being and a building.

One of the patients he did this to said she felt “violated” and had lost her trust in medical staff. The initials were 4cm high. The patient also said “thought of someone doing this to me while I was unconscious is abhorrent."

The fact a small number of people might be ok with it doesn’t make it right. The surgeon did not say he was initialling his work because he was proud of it or anything similar. He said he did it to ‘relieve tension’.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 17, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> B.Sc. (St Andrews) M.B. Ch.B. (Manchester), and skin heals with scarring, and therefore leaving a non- functional area. The liver doesn’t scar.


The skin doesn't always leave a scar when it heals.
I also said "within reason".
And it is not true that the liver doesn't scar. It's called cirrhosis.

Mikey, if you were my doctor, I'd be wanting a second opinion bud.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 17, 2021)

travellor said:


> And sadly, this is also the best argument as to why any profession should never be allowed to self police.



Absolutely.

It's frightening and tragic how many people see the letters "Dr" and feel they can't question them.

There's an unwarranted automatic assumption of competence.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 17, 2021)

pm133 said:


> The skin doesn't always leave a scar when it heals.
> I also said "within reason".
> And it is not true that the liver doesn't scar. It's called cirrhosis.
> 
> Mikey, if you were my doctor, I'd be wanting a second opinion bud.


The liver doesn’t scar after surgery. And if you called me bud in the surgery you would leave looking for another doctor, pal.


----------



## travellor (Jun 17, 2021)

pm133 said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> It's frightening and tragic how many people see the letters "Dr" and feel they can't question them.
> 
> There's an unwarranted automatic assumption of competence.



Not any more.
It used to be, when the profession closed ranks, and the news wasn't easily available.
Not it's easy to go online, the harsh reality has appeared.
It's exactly the same as any other profession.
Learn a trade, do it well, or do it badly.
Or coast down the centre.
You'd get away with it before, but now people are accountable, and the myth is dispelled.
Which is a good thing.


----------



## travellor (Jun 17, 2021)

rebrascora said:


> .................................I also wonder who did the most harm to the person who was traumatized by the information that this had been done to them. It was the knowledge which caused the psychological damage not the actual act and they never would have known if they hadn't been told, so the mental damage was in telling them.
> This sort of dilemma is interesting to think about albeit sad that someone is now struggling mentally as a result.



By that logic the victims of Reynhard Sinaga would have suffered no harm, and it was the fault of the police in contacting them to tell them of the crime, as the majority had no memory of the event?


----------



## Hardy (Jun 17, 2021)

My body,  my choice
Not anyone's elses choice without my consent.

The patient had to be told - once that information is known - otherwise that is further violation. Information is power.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 17, 2021)

travellor said:


> Not any more.
> It used to be, when the profession closed ranks, and the news wasn't easily available.
> Not it's easy to go online, the harsh reality has appeared.
> It's exactly the same as any other profession.
> ...



Well we're certainly getting that way in terms of people educating themselves. Obviously it doesn't mean we can self-diagnose accurately but it certainly means we have the ability to ask better questions of our doctors. For example, you might remember me whining about my diabetes consultant trying to stop my insulin because he said I was a Type 2. Well that's him literally just off the phone to confirm my c-peptide test has come back low, confirming Type 1. If I'd just obeyed him unquestioningly and come off insulin, I dread to think what state I'd be in right now. There's no doubt he's mis-diagnosing others as Type 2 and he's not alone out there.

Being in any trade or profession doesn't mean you are any damn good at it. It's odd that people even thought it was different from that. Many still do sadly.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 17, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> The liver doesn’t scar after surgery. And if you called me bud in the surgery you would leave looking for another doctor, pal.



Just like my own GP, I'd be using your first name if I was addressing you at all.
I don't ask people to call me by my academic title and I certainly never address others by theirs.

It's not 1960 anymore.


----------



## Amity Island (Jun 17, 2021)

pm133 said:


> Being in any trade or profession doesn't mean you are any damn good at it. It's odd that people even thought it was different from that. Many still do sadly.


So true!

It's all down to peoples morals, values, personalities and more often than not, ego's. As you say, it's not just builders from hell, it's doctors, nurses, surgeons, dentists too etc etc.........sales people, neighbours, care assistants, shop assistants, parents, kids, teachers, drivers etc etc........


----------



## pm133 (Jun 17, 2021)

Amity Island said:


> So true!
> 
> It's all down to peoples morals, values, personalities and more often than not, ego's. As you say, it's not just builders from hell, it's doctors, nurses, surgeons, dentists too etc etc.........sales people, neighbours, care assistants, shop assistants, parents, kids, teachers, drivers etc etc........


I would agree with the ego bit although I think it goes further than that.

In my experience it's also fuelled by entitlement and being surrounded by enablers.
These are people who have never been seriously challenged in their lives, realise their talent buys them a lot of leeway and now feel empowered to continue behaving in appalling ways.

Someone compared this guy to Banksie. A better comparison would be Jimmy Saville. Or Harvey Weinstein. Or Harold Shipman. Jeezo, we could be here all day.....

So what can we do about it?
We need to stop white knighting people. 
Stop putting people on pedestals.
Stop using someone's talent as an excuse for bad behaviour. 
That would be a great place for the rest of us to start.


----------



## travellor (Jun 17, 2021)

pm133 said:


> Just like my own GP, I'd be using your first name if I was addressing you at all.
> I don't ask people to call me by my academic title and I certainly never address others by theirs.
> 
> It's not 1960 anymore.


If a doctor needs to be addressed by their "title", I'd choose a new doctor.
If they aren't interested in actually attempting to develop a relationship, and can't realise that putting people at ease, rather than attempting to intimidate them is a better way to get people to open up, I won't be stopping.

It is an age thing I suspect, on both sides.
I have an elderly relative, we go to the same optician, she is on Mrs X terms with her, and won't "waster her time" telling her the problems she has with her eyes. She actually has several.
I'm on first name terms, (my relative is horrified) we chat about everything, I pay for a private OCT scan, we look at the images, and all in I probably spend an hour there, but I leave will the feeling she has given me a better service overall.


----------



## nonethewiser (Jun 17, 2021)

pm133 said:


> Someone compared this guy to Banksie. A better comparison would be Jimmy Saville. Or Harvey Weinstein. Or Harold Shipman. Jeezo, we could be here all day.....



Man has did wrong & been punished for it, but seriously you'd compare him to those 3 monsters, you need to have reality check about their crimes.

Thought better of you fella tbh.


----------



## Ditto (Jun 17, 2021)

He should be hung, drawn and quartered. I volunteer to do it!  I might let him live after, coz apparently you're still a bit alive after all that. He should then be struck off and his address given to all his previous marked patients.

Narcissist sounds like. And a git. Oh hang on, maybe not quartered.


----------



## travellor (Jun 17, 2021)

nonethewiser said:


> Man has did wrong & been punished for it, but seriously you'd compare him to those 3 monsters, you need to have reality check about their crimes.
> 
> Thought better of you fella tbh.


How about if he tattooed you on the outside? Still good with him then?
Just checking where your line is?


----------



## travellor (Jun 17, 2021)

Birdy said:


> He should be hung, drawn and quartered. I volunteer to do it!  I might let him live after, coz apparently you're still a bit alive after all that. He should then be struck off and his address given to all his previous marked patients.
> 
> Narcissist sounds like. And a git. Oh hang on, maybe not quartered.



Well, the quartering bit was actually the end of a drawn out death, 
So, no mercy?


----------



## pm133 (Jun 18, 2021)

nonethewiser said:


> Man has did wrong & been punished for it, but seriously you'd compare him to those 3 monsters, you need to have reality check about their crimes.
> 
> Thought better of you fella tbh.



I had a feeling my point would be missed.

Forget the crimes themselves. 
The reason behind why all of those people were able to behave as they did is exactly the same.


----------



## pm133 (Jun 18, 2021)

Birdy said:


> He should be hung, drawn and quartered. I volunteer to do it!  I might let him live after, coz apparently you're still a bit alive after all that. He should then be struck off and his address given to all his previous marked patients.
> 
> Narcissist sounds like. And a git. Oh hang on, maybe not quartered.



I might not be prepared to personally hang and draw him but to be honest, if he had done that to one of my kids or my wife I can tell you right now that losing his licence or going to jail would have been the least of his worries.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 21, 2021)

Good job none of you folk are in charge of sentencing guidelines in the courts.

And death threats are illegal. This forum is watched by more than just diabetic folk. All such forums are. GCHQ just trawls for key words.


----------



## Robin (Jun 21, 2021)

A lot of this discussion is academic anyway, I think.
The incidents happened in 2013, he was dismissed from his job and voluntarily relinquished his licence to practise.
He currently is not on the GMC roll and hasn’t worked as a surgeon since. The criminal case took til 2017 to come to court, and all the wrangling since has been about whether the GMC could reopen and re-examine their case for disciplinary proceedings in the light of the criminal conviction.
OK, it is open to Mr. Bramhall to seek to renew his licence in the future, but I doubt he’d get a job in the U.K.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 21, 2021)

This is the discussion that keeps on giving isn't it. Perhaps we should discuss something less divisive, like Brexit.


----------



## Ditto (Jun 21, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> Good job none of you folk are in charge of sentencing guidelines in the courts.
> 
> And death threats are illegal. This forum is watched by more than just diabetic folk. All such forums are. GCHQ just trawls for key words.


Good grief whatever happened to free speech. No such thing now of course. Now it seems to me all sympathy is with the do'ers, the victims don't matter.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jun 21, 2021)

Birdy said:


> whatever happened to free speech.


Snowflakes killed it and a media that wants to have it, but feels the need to oppress anyone else who uses it so they can push their own populist narrative and get miles of columns from that


----------



## travellor (Jun 21, 2021)

mikeyB said:


> Good job none of you folk are in charge of sentencing guidelines in the courts.
> 
> And death threats are illegal. This forum is watched by more than just diabetic folk. All such forums are. GCHQ just trawls for key words.



Death threats?
Where is that?
I noticed someone offered to volunteer as an hangman, if that job ever came back, and obviously if he was legally tried and found guilty, and sentenced under any new law passed to cover it, the "should" makes that quite clear. 
And death? If you're referring to the thread specifically stating he'd still be alive after, I'm starting to mistrust the profession myself now, as others have said.


----------



## travellor (Jan 11, 2022)

The surgeon who burned initials onto livers is struck off medical register              

'The Tribunal has therefore directed that Mr Bramhall's name be erased from the Medical Register.'

Seems to have taken a while, but finally there.


----------



## rebrascora (Jan 11, 2022)

The sad thing is that a highly skilled man is now no longer able to save lives! It is a lose, lose situation in my opinion.


----------



## travellor (Jan 12, 2022)

rebrascora said:


> The sad thing is that a highly skilled man is now no longer able to save lives! It is a lose, lose situation in my opinion.



No, he was a butcher, and treated people like animals.
He processed them, and branded them.
The world is a better place without people like that.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jan 12, 2022)

travellor said:


> No, he was a butcher, and treated people like animals.
> He processed them, and branded them.
> The world is a better place without people like that.


A bit harsh and inflammatory language - he saved the lives of many people including the person he branded through vanity.

Although I think its a positive outcome in the sense it demonstrates an effective due process from the medical profession resulting in a tough decision being made to maintain public confidence.


----------



## Inka (Jan 12, 2022)

Thanks for the update @travellor He acted unprofessionally and with an arrogance that could, in other situations, be dangerous. However skilled someone is, if they can’t control their ego, then they’re a liability.


----------



## travellor (Jan 12, 2022)

BlueArmy said:


> A bit harsh and inflammatory language - he saved the lives of many people including the person he branded through vanity.
> 
> Although I think its a positive outcome in the sense it demonstrates an effective due process from the medical profession resulting in a tough decision being made to maintain public confidence.



He didn't save the lives of many people.
He was one small person in the system.
There are many skilled surgeons working in the NHS.
And the organ donor scheme was the one key item that saves lives. 
Not a butcher that is replaceable.
How many times do people die because an organ is available, but a surgeon isn't?
I'd have waited for the next surgeon,  who wasn't a butcher that liked to leave his brand on people, thanks.


----------



## rebrascora (Jan 12, 2022)

It's really interesting how polarizing this is. I would happily allow this man to operate on me and sign his work if he wanted to. I might even joke about getting his autograph with him afterwards.  
I appreciate that people are viewing this very differently and no doubt my view of it is as surprising/disturbing to some of you, as your visceral responses are to me. I am not saying that what he did is OK but just that it doesn't shock me or even upset me and I would be surprised if he is the first surgeon to have done it or something similar, not that that makes it right.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jan 12, 2022)

travellor said:


> I'd have waited for the next surgeon,  who wasn't a butcher that liked to leave his brand on people, thanks.


Your choice - if I was in a life threatening position I’d want whatever licensed surgeon was available - most reasonable people wouldn’t ask to see a surgeons performance appraisal, CV or outcome metrics. I trust the medical profession to ensure safety in the same way I expect the rail, air or car manufacturing industries govern their safety records. This update proves the trust is well placed - although as discussed before - there was no medical risk in what he did so I think he is a egotistical and vain idiot but not unsafe although support the decision to strike him off for “bringing the profession into disrepute” effectively


----------



## travellor (Jan 12, 2022)

BlueArmy said:


> Your choice - if I was in a life threatening position I’d want whatever licensed surgeon was available - most reasonable people wouldn’t ask to see a surgeons performance appraisal, CV or outcome metrics. I trust the medical profession to ensure safety in the same way I expect the rail, air or car manufacturing industries govern their safety records. This update proves the trust is well placed - although as discussed before - there was no medical risk in what he did so I think he is a egotistical and vain idiot but not unsafe although support the decision to strike him off for “bringing the profession into disrepute” effectively



I don't disagree.

I think a lot of the problem is the way the public fed his ego.
He didn't save peoples lives. 

He was simply a small cog in a very large team, using advanced facilities to ensure that after a few practices he could, with a very skilled team around him, cut people open, scoop bits out, and put bits back.

Could he do it by himself - no.
Could he do it without the equipment - no
Can liver transplants be done without him - they haven't even blinked.
They wouldn't even have mis-stepped if he phoned up sick on the way to the theatre, the transplant would still have gone ahead.
In the process he was insignificant, just his ego was over inflated as a "surgeon"


----------



## nonethewiser (Jan 12, 2022)

Sensible result all round, wrong what he did & only himself to blame.


----------



## BlueArmy (Jan 12, 2022)

travellor said:


> I don't disagree.
> 
> I think a lot of the problem is the way the public fed his ego.
> He didn't save peoples lives.
> ...


I get your point - but with some corrections - he is the largest cog in a large team put in to place to support him - so I stand by the point he saved thousands of lives.

In the same way - Lewis Hamilton has been the world F1 champion many times


----------



## travellor (Jan 12, 2022)

BlueArmy said:


> I get your point - but with some corrections - he is the largest cog in a large team put in to place to support him - so I stand by the point he saved thousands of lives.
> 
> In the same way - Lewis Hamilton has been the world F1 champion many times



And, in the same way, if he didn't race, the track would still be filled, with drivers waiting.
The start wouldn't be delayed, the chequered flag would still fall, his replacement would step straight onto the podium.


----------

