Home Biography Services Health Advice
Email paddy@paddydewan.com if you what a better healthcare system in Australia.

We are sill awating the outcome of VCAT - On return from the earlier trip to Ethiopia this year Paddy attended VCAT to participate in what is a distraction from improvements in the healthcare, adverse event management agenda, while appealing against a vexatious, vindictive claim related to one case with no adverse event 8 years ago - when challenged about their view, the medical board responded through their lawyer -
SBH-18712031917130_(1)_-_ltr_to_Bolsin.pdf - suggesting that one is "guilty" of pleading innocent.

VCAT and Medical Board

1. If you are unhappy with the healthcare system in Australia, let us work together to resolve some of the problems, namely,
a. a lack of by medical administrators accountability for patient outcomes.
b. the adversial nature of dealing with complaints and complications.
c. a lack of accountability for costs of legal service used by hospitals and the medical board.
d. little transparency in the handling of complaints.
e. inappropriate protection of those making false claims.

To summarise......."Legal argument is (VERY) bad medicine" and the medical board is wasting healthcare dollars - if you want system share this website. The lack of accountability is reflected in a presentation to the Victorian Legislative Council, located that the end of the
Biography page on this site.

2. Note the ridicule of a previous VCAT panel is in the Supreme Court Judge's ruling -
Supreme Court Decision. Also, note the medical debate that supports the care given to the boy in 2004, and the concerns about other therapies offered in Melbourne Rectal Ectasia.

3. Hugh Martin is a Paediatric Surgeon from Sydney, gave evidence against Professor Dewan in a VCAT hearing for a second occasion. Two letters were written to him about adverse comments he made on another matter PRIOR to being asked and agreeing with the medical board of Australia to give evidence - Hugh Martin has refused to substantiate the adverse comments he made before July 2009. The letters are
Martin letter and Martin letter 2. His only response was Martin response. He again gave evidence against Professor Dewan in 2012. Does this not raise concerns about natural justice? Should a court rely on someone who has already shown prejudice; Hugh Martin was a member of the Australasian College of Surgeons Council at the time of his initial involvement; these letters are known by the President of the College; a complaint has been lodged with the College, but no action taken, nor have they provided any support for a member of their organisation. Instead, inappropriate letters of threat of withdrawal of my Fellowship were received.

4. Observations of those who have watched VCAT -
VCAT Observation and Another VCAT Observation - they do not reflect well on the process.

5. Letters from parents, one who was treated by another surgeon who has had 25 complaints against him submitted to the medical board and no formal hearing -
Infected penis - who cares?. Also a family of a more recent case of megarectum resection that the parents are happy to share - megarectum truth, and a letter from Nathan - Nathan's Letter.

6. The Austalian Medical Associated, of which I hold membership, has been made aware of the failure of the medical board to deal with the information presented to it - see below, and have not taken any action, nor provided any support during the proceedings in VCAT, with the industrial relations staff having clearly indicated that the process of dismissal of Professor Dewan from both the Western Network and the Royal Children's having been a "witch hunt".

Herald Sun - Questions VCAT standard: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/surgeon-paddy-dewan-continues-court-battle-to-practice-over-misconduct-allegations/story-e6frf7jo-1226201275788

The "AGE" - Adverse Events are still not reported: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/hospital-blunder-probe-20110306-1bjmn.html.

Manningham Leader - claims against Dewan vexatious: http://manningham-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/templestowe-surgeon-paddy-dewan-wants-back-in/

"The case" against Paddy is a false allegation to which there is no substance. Paddy was sacked from the Royal Children's after complaining about the handling of the death of a renal transplant girl. He has presented, along with parents, over 100 cases to the medical board that have not been investigated adequately, yet a boy for whom Paddy has provided international best practice care for, initially resulted in "supervision" order, which would have ended in a few months. The threat from the VCAT (circus) was suspension of of his licence for 12 months.......for a case operated on in 2004. The VCAT decision was more than wrong, which is what I said before Justice Beach of the Supreme Court intervened. It shows that an individual can be vilified in Australian healthcare for speaking out about concerns regarding quality.

And, in my situation, what is driving the medical board? Why have almost 100 complaints by parents through me not gone to a formal hearing? Is it because the complaints are against others, not Professor Dewan.

An appeal was lodged with the Supreme Court and a stay of the determination meant that Professor Dewan continued to provide care for children all over the world. Julia Medew, writing in "the Age" on 26th July mentions the appeal, but did not publish any of the extensive story that she has been told about the Dewan submissions of adverse outcome from others, to the medical board, nor did she indicate the material as presented to the legislative council in Victoria that indicated healthcare systemic dysfunction. Julia's article does no not appropropriately inform the public in her recent article - http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/surgeon-wins-appeal-over-unnecessary-operation-suspension-20111122-1nse0.html The ABC says very little - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-21/judge-orders-retrial-for-surgeon/3684068/?site=melbourne&section=news

Dr Emil Popovic, a neurosurgeon in Melbourne and Perth, who considered himself unfairly vilified, died. Emil is reported to have taken his own life in late March, 2011, and it is well known that his career was decimated by false allegation and exclusion, as has also occurred in Sydney with Charlie Tao. Why do we have this repeated theme in medicine?

Home
Biography
Services
Health Advice
Wetting
Urine Infection
Kidney disease
Bladder
Urethra
Labial Fusion
Penis Health
Testes
Hernias
Probono Surgery
Bowel
Publications
Poetry
Upcoming Events
Contact Us
Medicopolitical
 If you have any feedback on how we can make our new website better please do contact us and we would like to hear from you. 
Site Map