AddThis SmartLayers

Surgeon complains over reporting of allegations

A surgeon who had faced allegations over his fitness to practice has complained about a newspaper’s coverage of his case.

The unnamed doctor had appeared before a Fitness to Practice panel which was reported in the Staffordshire Newsletter.

However the weekly title had failed to publish a follow-up story when the panel found that the surgeon’s performance was not deficient.

He complained to the Press Complaints Commission saying the newspaper had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) and Clause 2 (Opportunity to reply) of the Editors’ Code of Practice.

The complaint was resolved when the original story was removed from the newspaper’s website and the PCC negotiated the publication of a follow-up article both in print and online.

A Fitness to Practise Panel comprises medical and non-medical people appointed to inquire into allegations of impaired fitness to practise.

In another recent PCC case, the Manchester Evening News apologised after attributing comments at a conference organised by Salford Council to a business chief who had not been present at it.

Paul McGee, managing director of PMA International Ltd complained to the PCC under Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code over a story about the seminar.

The complaint was resolved when the PCC negotiated the publication of a correction which read as follows:

“On May 6, 2014, we published an article which stated that Mr Paul McGee, Managing Director, PMA International Ltd, had delivered and spoken at an event organised by Salford council.

“We quoted comments from attendees relating to the performance of the speaker which we acknowledge did not relate to Mr McGee.

“We would like to correct the report and confirm that Mr McGee neither attended, nor spoke at the event.

“The Manchester Evening News offers its apologies to Mr McGee for the inaccuracies and any inconvenience caused.”

One comment

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • July 29, 2014 at 3:20 pm

    The surgeon case was either sheer bad management or inexperience.
    Answer is following up and keeping an office diary, and checking it every workday.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)