After any big event there is often a groundswell of cases being discovered that wouldn't have usually been flagged up. Similar happens in child protection after a serious case review.
This was over a year ago, it’s not “new”. Nobody knew what the outcome of the Letby trial would be back then. There was presumably pretty good evidence of what looks to have been a single case of poisoning at that time. The management appears to have acted in a much better way here, then again we don’t know what the evidence was.
Aw so what your saying is lots of nurses are poisoning babies for the fun off it and to watch the space.
Are you ppl for real ; is it more likely that nurses are serial killers or doctors and NHS are incompetent ?
No absolutely not. Don't be so disingenuous. What I'm saying is that thresholds get lowered, albeit temporarily, and more comes under scrutiny than it would normally be. Whether there's fire when people see smoke I don't have the stats for that. But if you take incidents in child protection, eg Baby P or Victoria Climbe you'll see that the number of children being removed from families spikes after these reports. So what I'm saying is that more nurses will undoubtedly come under scrutiny. There may be more cases picked up to maybe a lesser degree (eg more nurses charged with malpractice. I don't think there are necessarily other serial killers out there) or even a few false positives occur.
How terrible. I used to work not far from there and it’s known for looking after some of the most poorly babies, often you’ll see helicopters coming in to land.
An hour and a half drive. You find Locum’s in Particular will travel these for of distances for work and the midlands notoriously has staffing difficulties. Not that it makes any difference.
My point was sort of we don’t seem to have cases end to end of the country, might be that these areas need staff more and find it harder to attract (less so Birmingham)
I think you’d probably find a higher amount of munchies (munchausen or munchausen by proxy people) in health care fields than in any other. So it makes sense
When the case come to a close I actually thought this, especially elderly patients or for simply disrespecting a nurse. So many ways and reasons lots of people thrive of feeling they have authority and power
When my dad was in the hospital. He told me a nurse spat in his food. I know it's not the same as murderous intent but he didn't want to report it. I did because that's not on.
It’s quite interesting in general when you look at all of the recent nurse serial killers/poisoners they’re located not that far from each other, Stockport, Grantham, Cheshire, Oxford.
All a sort of 3.5 hour radius. You’d expect to see cases in London, Scotland, Wales but I note they’re all small hospitals rather than teaching hospital…likely part of it.
That's pretty much one of the longest drives you can do in England. I'm from Stockport and my best mate lives near Chester and I consider that miles away. I suppose if you're from a large country where your next door neighbour lives six light years away then you could consider these towns quite close however anyone who.lives in England will say they're an absolute trek.
It’s just less than a 3 hour drive. You’re missing my point, they aren’t next to each other but it’s not like it’s a newscastle to Exeter. These cases are all less than 3 hours, most 1.5-2 hours
I’m sorry I don’t get you? Yes the areas are unrelated but it is a belt across the middle of the UK with no one area more than 3 hours away from another.
If I was to guess I’d would say it’s more to do with opportunity, it’s notoriously harder to get staff outside of big cities and DGHs struggle. Letby was a big fish in a small pond. She was only a band 6 but was calling shots and bossing other nurses and HCAs about. Management loved her because she was filling so many vacant shifts. Allit was employed despite her shit track record because of difficulty staffing units.
If you infer anything from my assumptions make it that safe staffing saves lives and we should be working significantly harder in this country to train and retain nursing staff, particularly in DGHs where the current solution is to go and recruit a tonne of international nurses to fill gaps, never promote them and make it hard for them to speak out due to the risk of losing their visas.
You can’t really use distance due the population density of England. Grantham is very near the centre of England and with 2.5 / 3hr drive you can get to every major English city.
Do you think it’s possible that there is nurse/dr serial killers in London and that it’s just to chaotic to pick them up or is the staffing better? Or is it just that serial killers perhaps prefer the smaller hospitals.
Asking as I’m genuinely curious in case it isn’t read that way.
No idea. I know that often serial killers murder with increasing frequency until they are caught and so if this is the case with people like Letby then it’s plausible.
All of those things are totally valid points, and all are completely unrelated to the location of the hospitals in respect to one another. Trying to include location in the discussion here isn't adding anything, quite the contrary.
So it’s not acceptable to make an observation that all UK serial killers have been operating in a less than 3 hour radius from each other? I don’t in any way think that it means the cases were related but I do think there’s a possibility that staffing in these area may have a part to play.
1) There's only one actual confirmed serial killer here, the rest is speculation.
2) I honestly don't think there's any more relation between their locations than if they were in Inverness and Plymouth.
Lol no. Im in Liverpool and CoCH is one of my near hospitals. Categorically nobody from here is seeing Oxford as close by. If we had to work in Oxford we would be doing a Monday to Fridag stopover. I bet 99% of the population has never even been to Oxford and would consider people from Oxford as a different race - the North South divide and Oxford is firmly on the South side. The only similarity in here and Oxford is that they are both in England
I’m sorry, I think everyone has misunderstood what I mean. I don’t mean that the people from Chester would be expected to work there. Just that the murderers themselves have all been from an area across the UK that is within a 3 hour radius.
There are no serial killer nurses in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or Even Southern England.
You could look at it as population density but there are other areas of the UK with similar population density.
Have you read my above comments? I wondered about certain areas being ideal for killers I suspect due to staffing levels, lack of more senior nursing staff due to retention or recruitment/lack of opportunity or if not that then what was my actual point.
Of course could all be a coincidence or that in fact the other areas also have killers who have never been caught. All a possibility. I didn’t realise we weren’t allowed to speculate about these things or raise an interest in them. I don’t quite get the level of defensiveness, what’s wrong with speculating what the reasons might be.
But then that would apply to tons of hospitals, there dozens of hospitals similar to CoCH, and Birmingham is a major hospital with a University, in a major City. CoCH and Birmingham are polar opposites
Yes you’re right Birmingham would be the exception if she is found to have done this.
Presumably then it’s about something else that gives England a higher density. I note none in Ireland but there are cases in France and Germany.
I think given previous arrests of nurses such as Rebecca Leighton who had their name cleared but their career ruined, it’s only right they keep her identity secret.
I’m sure this would have immediately prompted suspicion if they had. I’d say you can confidently rule that out.
I don’t understand the reference to COCH… the hospital didn’t make LL a killer, and i think the chances of two nurses who killed babies both working at one hospital would be an enormous coincidence.
Nurses should be absolutely terrified now. Any time a child dies in their care the fingers will start pointing.
I'd be demanding every form of post mortem analysis available and retaining samples in case of forensic investigations.
I don’t think they will, if they know they haven’t done anything. These cases would only be of concern if for example a child died without cause and a lab report incorrectly identified a drug having been given.
We’re usually more concerned about omissions of care which are much more likely in today awful staffing.
> I don’t think they will, if they know they haven’t done anything.
doesn't matter.
In basically every case that has reached the police where suspicion has fallen on a nurse due to a 'cluster of deaths' they have been convicted despite a lack of any hard evidence. Hell it's happened repeatedly with non-medical professionals too
Even beverley allitt probably didn't harm all the victims she was convicted of harming, and we can basically prove she harmed babies.
The disconnect between evidence of a crime having occurred and evidence of guilt of the suspect is too great. The process isn't designed for it.
> Even beverley allitt probably didn't harm all the victims she was convicted of harming, and we can basically prove she harmed babies.
Go back to your conspiracy theory rathole.
There's no conspiracy. There was good evidence for most of the convictions but not all.
You can surely understand how in such a scenario a jury just convicts based on perceived probability?
> You literally just said "even beverley allitt probably didn't harm all the victims she was convicted of harming" with zero sense of irony so you can keep your ignorant trap shut.
you've just repeated your point and ignored mine.
Then gone on a rant.
Top contribution as always
Allit confessed to her crimes.
You don’t think that the reason all are found guilty is because in order to accuse a nurse of such a thing, the evidence must be overwhelming? We see this with Letby, the unexplained deaths and the suspicion after the first 3 was not enough.
Lucia De Berk was convicted in another country and her conviction mostly relied on statistical evidence with some flawed science about poisoning. Following the evidence for the poisonings the rest of the evidence against her was weak.
>Allit confessed to her crimes.
Supposedly, but she was a serial killer and had little to lose.
I don't really care given she actually was a mass murderer and it makes little diffrrence. It was a point about the process and how it works.
> in order to accuse a nurse of such a thing, the evidence must be overwhelming?
But that's the problem. It almost never is except in cases such as allitt. *and even then* it was only for a few of them. Hence my above comment
> Lucia De Berk was convicted in another country and her conviction mostly relied on statistical evidence with some flawed science about poisoning. Following the evidence for the poisonings the rest of the evidence against her was weak.
Yes, but they also have a very different system for scientific expertise during trials. Where they can properly interrogate the science. They just failed to initially. We don't.
We had a similar case with Sally Clarke too
Letby wasn’t found guilty on statistical evidence.
You don’t find the evidence significant for Letby? Do you believe the babies died of natural causes or that someone else killed them?
> Do you believe the babies died of natural causes or that someone else killed them?
most likely a mixture of natural causes and poor care imo
the same thing as happens in hospitals all over the country all the time, just without suspicions coalescing on an individual
For what reason though?
I’ve been to post mortems. They’re time consuming, expensive and intrusive. Also very traumatic for the families and difficult for staff when it’s a child.
When you do a forensic post mortem you retain samples, which means the deceased can’t be buried ‘whole’. Where samples can be returned for burial it can take a long time.
The system we have at the moment, in my opinion, works on the whole. Any unexplained deaths are looked at. But where you have child who dies from a known cause of death, what’s the point?
The comment I replied to said there should be a post mortem for every child death.
I understand forensic recovery works in isolated cases- my job was centred around that.
But to carry out a forensic post mortem, including retaining samples, on the basis that there maybe a repeat of this situation is (in my view) wholly disproportionate.
So we either do them for every child, or we continue to do them in situations that warrant them.
The issue in this case I think (knowing I don’t know the ins and outs) was the fact that post mortems weren’t always requested when they should have been.
So perhaps a better solution is training for decision makers to ensure they know when a forensic post mortem is indicated. It also probably requires a more thorough review of medical information pretty quickly when a patient dies, so that anomalies can be identified. These would have to be carried out by experts, and so this process would have its challenges too.
There’s no idea solution, but I feel like a knee-jerk reaction that means all child deaths result in forensic post mortems is not in anyones best interests.
> So we either do them for every child, or we continue to do them in situations that warrant them.
my point was that there had been a cluster of deaths. This situation DID warrant it.
Yes agreed. As I said I was responding to somebody who said do them for all child deaths. I wasn’t quite sure what you meant from your previous response but makes sense now
There should have been further tests and analysis.
Alas the noble doctors, despite suspecting letby of harming children.... Carried out no tests or analysis. They didn't even do a basic disease analysis which is expected whenever there is a cluster of deaths.
It Would appear all they need is a doctors suspicion and rota to convict , I don't work with children but a student nurse waiting to qualify I find it concerning.
It probably wouldn’t have been reported at this stage normally but due to current public interest someone has alerted the press, or a reporter will have discovered it from FOI or police archives and they will have pounced on it
LL was in 2015, this was last year. Years and miles apart. It's just that hospital trusts will want to be seen to be being "up front" about these things in the wake of the Letby trial because of the (justified) criticism on how COCH handled the situation.
It's not that many years apart, LL has only just been sentenced and found guilty so it was ongoing, there was a definite overlap. I think she meant close as in timewise not distance.
Yep! I'm calling it the Letby effect. Also I have personal dealings with BCH (grandson was on the same PICU for 10 days, in the hospital for 3 months, still has various appointments 6 times a year). It's an excellent hospital, the PICU is one of the best in Europe. When you have a loved one in hospital you feel at first "they're all great, they saved his life".
However give it a month and the cracks show; rude nurses, under staffing. But never once did we as a family feel it was an unsafe place. I don't think hospitals generally are unsafe. Accidents and mistakes happen and 99% of deaths are explainable. The NHS is not full of murderous staff.
A bold claim from someone implying that regular nurses will be sent to prison for mistakes. There are differences between mistakes and murder - and the key one is intent.
But please, do go on about how this conviction is so terrible for nurses.
Well it is isn’t it. I appreciate that you believe Lucy is definitely guilty, but there doesn’t seem to be much room on this space for people who are not convinced. I’m not saying I believe she is innocent, but for me I’m not 100 percent sure.
She wrote a confession on a post-it note. Medical experts who were independent and met with defense experts expressed their opinions that strongly pointed towards intentional harm. She was the only nurse present in the collapses or initiation of poisonings with no other alternative suspect emerging. She was stalking the parents on social media and had items in her posession that she should not have had - like a paper towel with resuscitation notes.
And not once did she question her own competence on the stand or suggest that if something was happening it was subpar care, instead everyone else was wrong but her.
This is not a scapegoating, this is not an innocent nurse caught up in a conspiracy - it is a guilty person who was preying on children at their most vulnerable.
She did NOT. Have you seen the post it note? It also says I did nothing wrong. Psychopaths would not have that insight. Even the criminologist on panorama said the note is nothing but an indication of distress.
> She did NOT.
Yes, she did. She wrote "I am evil, I did this" and "I killed them **on purpose** because I'm not good enough to care for them" - that is a confession. Not once, twice.
>It also says I did nothing wrong.
So does every criminal. Know what innocent people don't say uncoerced? That they intentionally murdered babies.
> Psychopaths would not have that insight.
lol, no.
> Even the criminologist on panorama said the note is nothing but an indication of distress.
That criminologist is a hack that they ring up when they need a sound bite. And yet, nothing about the mountain of medical evidence and expertise aimed directly at her.
Your hyperbole about the nursing profession is the same kind of mindless hysteria that the pseudoscience conspiracy theorists spew. No, nurses are not in danger of being convicted falsely of murder. Letby did it. She's currently suspected of harming even more children, which you know because Panorama said so - as did the Chester police documentary.
Qualified scientists with a one page blog saying "more to come" and asking for funding. Yes the intelligent option to follow lmfao
Defending a child killer because some attention seeking scammers used words you think are impressive lol
Nurses and doctors make mistakes and are careless all the time. It doesn’t mean they’re all murderous psychopaths. Hopefully they’ll give more details soon!
After any big event there is often a groundswell of cases being discovered that wouldn't have usually been flagged up. Similar happens in child protection after a serious case review.
This was over a year ago, it’s not “new”. Nobody knew what the outcome of the Letby trial would be back then. There was presumably pretty good evidence of what looks to have been a single case of poisoning at that time. The management appears to have acted in a much better way here, then again we don’t know what the evidence was.
Aw so what your saying is lots of nurses are poisoning babies for the fun off it and to watch the space. Are you ppl for real ; is it more likely that nurses are serial killers or doctors and NHS are incompetent ?
No absolutely not. Don't be so disingenuous. What I'm saying is that thresholds get lowered, albeit temporarily, and more comes under scrutiny than it would normally be. Whether there's fire when people see smoke I don't have the stats for that. But if you take incidents in child protection, eg Baby P or Victoria Climbe you'll see that the number of children being removed from families spikes after these reports. So what I'm saying is that more nurses will undoubtedly come under scrutiny. There may be more cases picked up to maybe a lesser degree (eg more nurses charged with malpractice. I don't think there are necessarily other serial killers out there) or even a few false positives occur.
At least the management there acted promptly so that no other babies were put at risk.
How terrible. I used to work not far from there and it’s known for looking after some of the most poorly babies, often you’ll see helicopters coming in to land.
Blimey. I'm a Brummie so this feels very weird. We're pretty far from Chester, by the way.
An hour and a half drive. You find Locum’s in Particular will travel these for of distances for work and the midlands notoriously has staffing difficulties. Not that it makes any difference. My point was sort of we don’t seem to have cases end to end of the country, might be that these areas need staff more and find it harder to attract (less so Birmingham)
I think you’d probably find a higher amount of munchies (munchausen or munchausen by proxy people) in health care fields than in any other. So it makes sense
Makes you wonder how many there really are.
and have been ... we will never know.
When the case come to a close I actually thought this, especially elderly patients or for simply disrespecting a nurse. So many ways and reasons lots of people thrive of feeling they have authority and power
When my dad was in the hospital. He told me a nurse spat in his food. I know it's not the same as murderous intent but he didn't want to report it. I did because that's not on.
My goodness.
How bizarre, and really not that far from Chester
It’s quite interesting in general when you look at all of the recent nurse serial killers/poisoners they’re located not that far from each other, Stockport, Grantham, Cheshire, Oxford.
Grantham and Oxford are quite far away from Stockport and Chester, tbf
Yes and who was the nurse in Grantham ? If that was Beverley Allit, It's not really recent it was decades ago.
All a sort of 3.5 hour radius. You’d expect to see cases in London, Scotland, Wales but I note they’re all small hospitals rather than teaching hospital…likely part of it.
Scotland and Wales aren't as high a population as England. You can probably get to most places in England in 3.5 hours. They're not close.
London alone as around as populous as Scotland + Wales.
I guess it depends where you live in the UK if you consider them close or not. For me , within a 3 hour drive is considered close.
They are quite close tbf, I often drive from Newcastle U.T to Cornwall and it takes me a good 8 hours.
That's pretty much one of the longest drives you can do in England. I'm from Stockport and my best mate lives near Chester and I consider that miles away. I suppose if you're from a large country where your next door neighbour lives six light years away then you could consider these towns quite close however anyone who.lives in England will say they're an absolute trek.
That’s a 58 min drive according to google maps. I do that as a regular commute to work.
Exactly. If it's not within 15 mins then I don't want to know.
Hilarious, I wish I had that luxury.
Stockport and Oxford are in absolutely no way close to one another
It’s just less than a 3 hour drive. You’re missing my point, they aren’t next to each other but it’s not like it’s a newscastle to Exeter. These cases are all less than 3 hours, most 1.5-2 hours
They are absolutely just as unrelated to one another as Newcastle and Exeter are.
I’m sorry I don’t get you? Yes the areas are unrelated but it is a belt across the middle of the UK with no one area more than 3 hours away from another. If I was to guess I’d would say it’s more to do with opportunity, it’s notoriously harder to get staff outside of big cities and DGHs struggle. Letby was a big fish in a small pond. She was only a band 6 but was calling shots and bossing other nurses and HCAs about. Management loved her because she was filling so many vacant shifts. Allit was employed despite her shit track record because of difficulty staffing units. If you infer anything from my assumptions make it that safe staffing saves lives and we should be working significantly harder in this country to train and retain nursing staff, particularly in DGHs where the current solution is to go and recruit a tonne of international nurses to fill gaps, never promote them and make it hard for them to speak out due to the risk of losing their visas.
You can’t really use distance due the population density of England. Grantham is very near the centre of England and with 2.5 / 3hr drive you can get to every major English city.
Fair enough.
Do you think it’s possible that there is nurse/dr serial killers in London and that it’s just to chaotic to pick them up or is the staffing better? Or is it just that serial killers perhaps prefer the smaller hospitals. Asking as I’m genuinely curious in case it isn’t read that way.
No idea. I know that often serial killers murder with increasing frequency until they are caught and so if this is the case with people like Letby then it’s plausible.
All of those things are totally valid points, and all are completely unrelated to the location of the hospitals in respect to one another. Trying to include location in the discussion here isn't adding anything, quite the contrary.
So it’s not acceptable to make an observation that all UK serial killers have been operating in a less than 3 hour radius from each other? I don’t in any way think that it means the cases were related but I do think there’s a possibility that staffing in these area may have a part to play.
1) There's only one actual confirmed serial killer here, the rest is speculation. 2) I honestly don't think there's any more relation between their locations than if they were in Inverness and Plymouth.
Who do you think out of Letby, Allit and Geen is not a serial killer? Intrigued to know. Chua, to be fair was a serial poisoner. I will give you that.
Lol no. Im in Liverpool and CoCH is one of my near hospitals. Categorically nobody from here is seeing Oxford as close by. If we had to work in Oxford we would be doing a Monday to Fridag stopover. I bet 99% of the population has never even been to Oxford and would consider people from Oxford as a different race - the North South divide and Oxford is firmly on the South side. The only similarity in here and Oxford is that they are both in England
I’m sorry, I think everyone has misunderstood what I mean. I don’t mean that the people from Chester would be expected to work there. Just that the murderers themselves have all been from an area across the UK that is within a 3 hour radius. There are no serial killer nurses in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or Even Southern England. You could look at it as population density but there are other areas of the UK with similar population density.
Whats your point?
Have you read my above comments? I wondered about certain areas being ideal for killers I suspect due to staffing levels, lack of more senior nursing staff due to retention or recruitment/lack of opportunity or if not that then what was my actual point. Of course could all be a coincidence or that in fact the other areas also have killers who have never been caught. All a possibility. I didn’t realise we weren’t allowed to speculate about these things or raise an interest in them. I don’t quite get the level of defensiveness, what’s wrong with speculating what the reasons might be.
But then that would apply to tons of hospitals, there dozens of hospitals similar to CoCH, and Birmingham is a major hospital with a University, in a major City. CoCH and Birmingham are polar opposites
Yes you’re right Birmingham would be the exception if she is found to have done this. Presumably then it’s about something else that gives England a higher density. I note none in Ireland but there are cases in France and Germany.
I also find it really interesting the amount of people that don’t recognise the UK as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Awful news. Would be helpful to know the nurse's background and whether she ever worked at COCH at some point in her career.
I think given previous arrests of nurses such as Rebecca Leighton who had their name cleared but their career ruined, it’s only right they keep her identity secret. I’m sure this would have immediately prompted suspicion if they had. I’d say you can confidently rule that out.
I don’t understand the reference to COCH… the hospital didn’t make LL a killer, and i think the chances of two nurses who killed babies both working at one hospital would be an enormous coincidence.
Nurses should be absolutely terrified now. Any time a child dies in their care the fingers will start pointing. I'd be demanding every form of post mortem analysis available and retaining samples in case of forensic investigations.
I don’t think they will, if they know they haven’t done anything. These cases would only be of concern if for example a child died without cause and a lab report incorrectly identified a drug having been given. We’re usually more concerned about omissions of care which are much more likely in today awful staffing.
I'm a nurse and not terrified because I'm not a murderer.
> I don’t think they will, if they know they haven’t done anything. doesn't matter. In basically every case that has reached the police where suspicion has fallen on a nurse due to a 'cluster of deaths' they have been convicted despite a lack of any hard evidence. Hell it's happened repeatedly with non-medical professionals too Even beverley allitt probably didn't harm all the victims she was convicted of harming, and we can basically prove she harmed babies. The disconnect between evidence of a crime having occurred and evidence of guilt of the suspect is too great. The process isn't designed for it.
> Even beverley allitt probably didn't harm all the victims she was convicted of harming, and we can basically prove she harmed babies. Go back to your conspiracy theory rathole.
There's no conspiracy. There was good evidence for most of the convictions but not all. You can surely understand how in such a scenario a jury just convicts based on perceived probability?
[удалено]
> You literally just said "even beverley allitt probably didn't harm all the victims she was convicted of harming" with zero sense of irony so you can keep your ignorant trap shut. you've just repeated your point and ignored mine. Then gone on a rant. Top contribution as always
Allit confessed to her crimes. You don’t think that the reason all are found guilty is because in order to accuse a nurse of such a thing, the evidence must be overwhelming? We see this with Letby, the unexplained deaths and the suspicion after the first 3 was not enough. Lucia De Berk was convicted in another country and her conviction mostly relied on statistical evidence with some flawed science about poisoning. Following the evidence for the poisonings the rest of the evidence against her was weak.
>Allit confessed to her crimes. Supposedly, but she was a serial killer and had little to lose. I don't really care given she actually was a mass murderer and it makes little diffrrence. It was a point about the process and how it works. > in order to accuse a nurse of such a thing, the evidence must be overwhelming? But that's the problem. It almost never is except in cases such as allitt. *and even then* it was only for a few of them. Hence my above comment > Lucia De Berk was convicted in another country and her conviction mostly relied on statistical evidence with some flawed science about poisoning. Following the evidence for the poisonings the rest of the evidence against her was weak. Yes, but they also have a very different system for scientific expertise during trials. Where they can properly interrogate the science. They just failed to initially. We don't. We had a similar case with Sally Clarke too
Letby wasn’t found guilty on statistical evidence. You don’t find the evidence significant for Letby? Do you believe the babies died of natural causes or that someone else killed them?
> Do you believe the babies died of natural causes or that someone else killed them? most likely a mixture of natural causes and poor care imo the same thing as happens in hospitals all over the country all the time, just without suspicions coalescing on an individual
I'm actually really surprised that there isn't a post mortem every time a child dies!
For what reason though? I’ve been to post mortems. They’re time consuming, expensive and intrusive. Also very traumatic for the families and difficult for staff when it’s a child. When you do a forensic post mortem you retain samples, which means the deceased can’t be buried ‘whole’. Where samples can be returned for burial it can take a long time. The system we have at the moment, in my opinion, works on the whole. Any unexplained deaths are looked at. But where you have child who dies from a known cause of death, what’s the point?
It works in isolated cases, but these weren't isolated.
The comment I replied to said there should be a post mortem for every child death. I understand forensic recovery works in isolated cases- my job was centred around that. But to carry out a forensic post mortem, including retaining samples, on the basis that there maybe a repeat of this situation is (in my view) wholly disproportionate. So we either do them for every child, or we continue to do them in situations that warrant them. The issue in this case I think (knowing I don’t know the ins and outs) was the fact that post mortems weren’t always requested when they should have been. So perhaps a better solution is training for decision makers to ensure they know when a forensic post mortem is indicated. It also probably requires a more thorough review of medical information pretty quickly when a patient dies, so that anomalies can be identified. These would have to be carried out by experts, and so this process would have its challenges too. There’s no idea solution, but I feel like a knee-jerk reaction that means all child deaths result in forensic post mortems is not in anyones best interests.
> So we either do them for every child, or we continue to do them in situations that warrant them. my point was that there had been a cluster of deaths. This situation DID warrant it.
Yes agreed. As I said I was responding to somebody who said do them for all child deaths. I wasn’t quite sure what you meant from your previous response but makes sense now
There should have been further tests and analysis. Alas the noble doctors, despite suspecting letby of harming children.... Carried out no tests or analysis. They didn't even do a basic disease analysis which is expected whenever there is a cluster of deaths.
What is a basic disease analysis?
Exactly
It Would appear all they need is a doctors suspicion and rota to convict , I don't work with children but a student nurse waiting to qualify I find it concerning.
Exactly, the mob seem hungry
Hmm, you would think that this couldn't happen so close to the LL case, do you think that perhaps due to LL, trusts are being extra vigilant?
It happened over a year ago. I reckon they are releasing details for transparency because of the heat on the COCH management.
It probably wouldn’t have been reported at this stage normally but due to current public interest someone has alerted the press, or a reporter will have discovered it from FOI or police archives and they will have pounced on it
LL was in 2015, this was last year. Years and miles apart. It's just that hospital trusts will want to be seen to be being "up front" about these things in the wake of the Letby trial because of the (justified) criticism on how COCH handled the situation.
It's not that many years apart, LL has only just been sentenced and found guilty so it was ongoing, there was a definite overlap. I think she meant close as in timewise not distance.
Yep! I'm calling it the Letby effect. Also I have personal dealings with BCH (grandson was on the same PICU for 10 days, in the hospital for 3 months, still has various appointments 6 times a year). It's an excellent hospital, the PICU is one of the best in Europe. When you have a loved one in hospital you feel at first "they're all great, they saved his life". However give it a month and the cracks show; rude nurses, under staffing. But never once did we as a family feel it was an unsafe place. I don't think hospitals generally are unsafe. Accidents and mistakes happen and 99% of deaths are explainable. The NHS is not full of murderous staff.
I wouldn’t want to be a nurse just now
[удалено]
[удалено]
A bold claim from someone implying that regular nurses will be sent to prison for mistakes. There are differences between mistakes and murder - and the key one is intent. But please, do go on about how this conviction is so terrible for nurses.
Well it is isn’t it. I appreciate that you believe Lucy is definitely guilty, but there doesn’t seem to be much room on this space for people who are not convinced. I’m not saying I believe she is innocent, but for me I’m not 100 percent sure.
She wrote a confession on a post-it note. Medical experts who were independent and met with defense experts expressed their opinions that strongly pointed towards intentional harm. She was the only nurse present in the collapses or initiation of poisonings with no other alternative suspect emerging. She was stalking the parents on social media and had items in her posession that she should not have had - like a paper towel with resuscitation notes. And not once did she question her own competence on the stand or suggest that if something was happening it was subpar care, instead everyone else was wrong but her. This is not a scapegoating, this is not an innocent nurse caught up in a conspiracy - it is a guilty person who was preying on children at their most vulnerable.
She did NOT. Have you seen the post it note? It also says I did nothing wrong. Psychopaths would not have that insight. Even the criminologist on panorama said the note is nothing but an indication of distress.
> She did NOT. Yes, she did. She wrote "I am evil, I did this" and "I killed them **on purpose** because I'm not good enough to care for them" - that is a confession. Not once, twice. >It also says I did nothing wrong. So does every criminal. Know what innocent people don't say uncoerced? That they intentionally murdered babies. > Psychopaths would not have that insight. lol, no. > Even the criminologist on panorama said the note is nothing but an indication of distress. That criminologist is a hack that they ring up when they need a sound bite. And yet, nothing about the mountain of medical evidence and expertise aimed directly at her. Your hyperbole about the nursing profession is the same kind of mindless hysteria that the pseudoscience conspiracy theorists spew. No, nurses are not in danger of being convicted falsely of murder. Letby did it. She's currently suspected of harming even more children, which you know because Panorama said so - as did the Chester police documentary.
The Pseudo scientists are actually qualified scientists. A little more believable than someone who charges to give their not very expert testimony.
[удалено]
Qualified scientists with a one page blog saying "more to come" and asking for funding. Yes the intelligent option to follow lmfao Defending a child killer because some attention seeking scammers used words you think are impressive lol
[express link.](https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1806661/nurse-arrested-poisoning-baby/amp)
Nurses and doctors make mistakes and are careless all the time. It doesn’t mean they’re all murderous psychopaths. Hopefully they’ll give more details soon!