AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
The Daily Fail has a long and detailed article which I'm going through. There is one mention of potentially doing a post mortem but it's not clear if this is a hospital or coronial one. The words coroner or coronial are not in the article. Dr A, her lover & fool seems an unintentional helper.
. My grandson spent 6months from birth in NICU and PICU having 2 open 
️ surgeries……..his little life was in their hands…..it would have been so easy for someone to tamper with the equipment keeping him alive. We are so lucky to have him alive and being a typical 6 year old unlike those poor families whose babies were murdered at the COCH.
She didn't listen to the victim inpact statements because she refused to becin the courtroom which is still allowed.The victim impact statements were heartbreaking. My grandson spent 6months from birth in NICU and PICU having 2 open
️ surgeries……..his little life was in their hands…..it would have been so easy for someone to tamper with the equipment keeping him alive. We are so lucky to have him alive and being a typical 6 year old unlike those poor families whose babies were murdered at the COCH.
On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
omny.fm
In particular, the inquiry must ask why no investigation into these unexplained baby deaths was ordered by hospital management until July 2016, more than a year after doctors first raised concerns. Two reviews in the second half of 2016, one by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and the second by a premature baby expert, recommended a thorough external independent review of each neonatal death and further forensic investigation; neither of these things happened. The senior management team did not keep the trust’s board informed of the findings of the reviews that had both called for further investigation; minutes show executives said the reviews concluded the issues were down to the unit’s leadership and timely intervention.
I think they need to bring in a law that all complaints of possible negligance by staff should be referred to an external source.Sounds like more arse covering, trying to avoid liability, and not setting a precedent for inquiries with Statutory powers to summon evidence and force witnesses testify on anything related to the NHS or Government in general.
If the same happened here in Australia in any State or Territory, would the same toothless type of inquiry be used too, or would a Royal Commission powers one be a sure bet?
The Observer view: only a robust inquiry will hold NHS to account over Lucy Letby murders | Observer editorial
Families need answers from the trust that allowed preventable deaths to happenwww.theguardian.com
'The Observer view: only a robust inquiry will hold NHS to account over Lucy Letby murders
Observer editorial
Families need answers from the trust that allowed preventable deaths to happen
Sun 20 Aug 2023 04.32 AEST
The murder of premature babies in their first few weeks of life by a medical professional is impossible to make sense of. But this is the crime of which Lucy Letby, a nurse in the neonatal unit at the Countess of Chester hospital, was last week convicted in relation to a number of vulnerable infants entrusted to her care. They were utterly dependent on the clinical staff in that unit. But Letby murdered seven babies, attacking some multiple times before she succeeded in killing them. She has also been convicted of the attempted murder of another six, two of whom have been left with brain damage as a result.
This makes Letby Britain’s worst child killer of modern times. She used a variety of means on her victims, including administering fatal injections of air, poisoning with insulin, overfeeding with milk and tampering with feeding tubes. The police have now begun the task of investigating the records of more than 4,000 babies across two hospitals whose care may have been tampered with by Letby. The critical question that needs answering now the criminal trial is concluded is how she was able to get away with these crimes over the course of more than a year and why some of these murders were not prevented after senior clinicians repeatedly raised red flags about their suspicions. A full assessment of how their babies were fatally let down by the system is the very least the families are owed.
The government has announced an independent inquiry into how the Letby murders were handled by the Countess of Chester hospital, but has so far declined to put it on a statutory footing. This is not good enough. The criminal trial and the reporting around it have highlighted evidence of grievous failings by the NHS trust that runs the hospital, but no one from hospital management was required to give evidence in the trial. It is of vital importance a statutory inquiry is given the power to summon evidence and force witnesses to testify, to examine not just the actions of the trust and its employees but other agencies involved in the events that unfolded, including the Care Quality Commission.
In particular, the inquiry must ask why no investigation into these unexplained baby deaths was ordered by hospital management until July 2016, more than a year after doctors first raised concerns. Two reviews in the second half of 2016, one by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and the second by a premature baby expert, recommended a thorough external independent review of each neonatal death and further forensic investigation; neither of these things happened. The senior management team did not keep the trust’s board informed of the findings of the reviews that had both called for further investigation; minutes show executives said the reviews concluded the issues were down to the unit’s leadership and timely intervention.
The hospital took a full year to remove Letby from the neonatal unit after suspicions were first raised, and members of its senior executive team are alleged to have claimed that the two reviews cleared Letby and said they would be moving her back to frontline work on the neonatal ward. In the interim, she was moved to the hospital’s risk and patient safety office where, despite the fact she was under suspicion of being associated with unexplained infant deaths, her role included raising serious incident investigation reports to the NHS.
The catalogue of failings does not stop there. It was a small group of consultant whistleblowers on the neonatal unit who played a key role in flagging their concerns; it is not clear that without them these crimes would have come to light, as the deaths were not properly reported to the NHS and so not picked up by its alert systems. Yet they were treated appallingly by hospital management: their calls for urgent meetings went unheeded; their concerns were treated dismissively and they say that once management had decided Letby should return to her post in 2017, two of them were instructed to enter a mediation process with her. They were warned her father had threatened to refer them to the General Medical Council unless they withdrew their allegations and were asked to write a letter of apology to her. The medical director who started in 2018, and who later became the chief executive of the trust, says she was warned by her predecessor that she would need to pursue action with the GMC against the whistleblowers (something he denies).
What we know so far about this truly awful case throws up familiar themes that crop up again and again in scandals that have in recent years beset failing NHS trusts, from mid-Staffs where hundreds died as a result of poor care at Stafford hospital, to the several maternity scandals that have emerged. Defensiveness in management culture; appallingly punitive treatment of whistleblowers; prioritisation of the reputation of a hospital over patient safety and dignity: the evil acts of Letby may thankfully be “exceedingly rare”, according to experts, but we have seen time and again how these toxic cultures produce avoidable deaths, injury and heartache for patients and families. In this case, it seems highly likely that failings by this hospital contributed to the preventable murder of babies. That would be a devastating verdict, and it is only right that the question of who is responsible and how this could have happened is handed to a statutory inquiry with the powers it needs to provide answers.
What complete and utter rubbish. Drag her in there kicking and screaming if you have to. Absolute bullshit and a final insult to the families.
Only speculation that she did it for thrills and thought she couldn't get caught and to be closer to a doctor she was infatuated with.
What they don't say is that she will be sharing that cell with Rosemary West and will be served meals with human excrement added like the late Bobby Sands.
Ok boomer.The alleged fraud and fake Prof. who presents this youtube is this deranged *******.
Are you a fan of his utility?
Edward Dutton
Edward Croft Dutton (1980–) is a far-right[3] eccentric English Youtuber grifter,[note 1] QAnon conspiracy theorist,[note 2] anti-vegan, and transphobe who writes articles for the white nationalist site VDARE and The Unz Review plus is a regular speaker on Mark Collett's white supremacist...rationalwiki.org
'Edward Croft Dutton (1980–) is a far-right eccentric English Youtuber grifter,[note 1] QAnon conspiracy theorist,[note 2] anti-vegan, and transphobe who writes articles for the white nationalist site VDARE and The Unz Review plus is a regular speaker on Mark Collett's white supremacist podcast Patriotic Weekly Review.[3][4][5][6] He is a disgraced academic and pseudointellectual who was investigated by the University of Oulo and found guilty of scientific misconduct due to plagiarism.[7] He is pretentious and claims to be a Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Asbiro University despite this being questionable at best. Critics label him a fraud.[8]
Dutton's views include eugenics, climate change denial,[9] race and intelligence pseudoscience, sexism, anti-feminism, transphobia, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-veganism, and white supremacy.[10][11] He has been accused of sympathising with terrorism for comments he made on a neo-Nazi podcast.[12] He is ex-editor-in-chief of the journal Mankind Quarterly and calls himself the Jolly Heretic on social media.[13][14] Dutton has a degree in Theology from Durham University and a PhD in religious studies from the University of Aberdeen.[15]
Dutton claims to be a proponent of freedom of speech and thinks there should be no censorship in science, writing: "If someone forcefully insists that a certain area is out of bounds and you’re ‘immoral’ for even contemplating it, then that is where new discoveries are going to lie."[16] The problem is he's a huge hypocrite. For example, he deletes any comments left on his YouTube videos that merely criticise him or his colleague Michael A. Woodley.
Unlike his closet racist associates such as Michael Woodley, Emil Kirkegaard, Nathan Cofnas, and Noah Carl,[note 3] Dutton is more open about his racist beliefs. He has regular friendly podcasts and public discussions with alt-right, neo-Nazi, and/or white supremacist outlets. In late 2020, he was the main guest of a podcast run by neo-nazi and white supremacist Richard Spencer on the topic "Making Sense of Race".[17]
Dutton promotes the pseudoscientific spiteful mutant hypothesis and a ridiculous fad diet known as the carnivore diet. He attacks liberals, vegetarians, vegans, homosexuals, transexuals, and people who dye their hair as "mentally ill" mutants. He is also a supporter of the white nationalist group Patriotic Alternative that promotes "White Lives Matter" banners around the UK.[18] In November 2022, Dutton began defending Graham Hancock's pseudoarchaeological theories including belief in Atlantis as an advanced culture saying he is "open-minded" and does not consider Hancock to be a pseudoarchaeologist.[19]
Dutton charges $147 to enroll on an online course in sociobiology at a fake (non-accredited) university named GegenUni.[20] Other bogus "lecturers" at the fake university include white nationalist Martin Sellner.[21]
Openly a eugenicist, Dutton's main reason for supporting abortion is his claim women who have abortions are less intelligent (on average) than women who do not.[22]
A disturbed individual, Dutton will often dress up and impersonate an autistic, disabled, feminist, homosexual or transexual person in his BitChute videos just to attack and mock them.
...'
Dont post crap like that mate
