A YOUNG woman who lodged a complaint with the Medical Council about a GP’s inappropriate language and behaviour didn’t want her own name publicised even though she wanted an inquiry into her doctor’s conduct to be held in public, the first public inquiry by the medical council’s fitness-to- practise committee was told yesterday.
The inquiry was told by Patrick Leonard, counsel for the chief executive of the medical council, that Alma McQuade wished the fitness-to-practise committee to request the media not to name her but he recognised the committee had no powers to do so.
However, Eileen Barrington, counsel for Dr Ross Ardill – the GP who was before the fitness-to-practise committee – said Ms McQuade had specifically requested that the inquiry be held in public.
She said there had been an earlier hearing in relation to whether the allegations against Dr Ardill, who practises at the Custom House Square Medical Centre at the IFSC, Dublin, would be held in public or private and it had been decided the inquiry would be held in public. If she had a concern about being named, she should have requested at that stage that the inquiry be held partially in private, she said.
She added that her client was having his name disclosed and she did not see why there should be some special treatment for Ms McQuade when she wanted the inquiry in public.
Prof Anthony Cunningham, chairman of the committee, said he would ask the press to exercise “sensitivity and discretion” in reporting the case.
No address was given for Ms McQuade at the inquiry but in evidence she told the three person inquiry team – two of whom were non-medics – that she works as an art psychotherapist with children in disadvantaged schools and patients in the psychiatric services. She also teaches literacy in the Probation Service.
Asked by Ms Barrington why she wanted the inquiry in public, she said she understood that was the only way she could have a friend accompany her to the inquiry.
She added that she was as surprised as Dr Ardill to see press reports about the inquiry in advance.
Ms Barrington had submitted earlier that Dr Ardill was not aware the Medical Council would be issuing a press release about the first fitness-to-practise inquiry it would be holding in public. It made things 10 times more stressful for Dr Ardill, she said.
Meanwhile, before Dr Ardill was found not guilty of professional misconduct by the committee, after several hours of evidence, Dr Ardill gave evidence that he had been one of 200 GPs to volunteer for a Medical Council audit of professional standards in general practice.
He said 25 consecutive patients had been asked at random to fill out questionnaires on his interaction with them and he scored 4.9 out of a possible five points when patients were asked if he treated them with respect.
All said they would go back to him or send a friend to him.
Dr Brian Maurer, a consultant cardiologist and medical director of the Irish Heart Foundation, told the inquiry that Dr Ardill had been a junior doctor under him between 1998 and 2000 and he found him to be “an excellent, competent and caring doctor” with communication skills that were “more than adequate”.
Asked if he thought that when a patient was offended by language used by a doctor this should be considered professional misconduct he said “absolutely not”.
All doctors were guilty of offending patients from time to time, he said.