AN INQUIRY into the fitness to practise of two doctors following the removal of a wrong kidney from a child at Our Lady’s Hospital for Sick Children in Crumlin, Dublin, has ended dramatically.
A fitness to practice committee of the medical council, which was yesterday hearing allegations of professional misconduct against Prof Martin Corbally and junior doctor Sri Paran, adjourned for lunch for half an hour but did not sit in public again for more than two hours. When it did its chairman Dr John Monaghan indicated the case against the doctors was effectively over, even though another witness was due to be called and closing submissions had not been made by all sides.
Dr Monaghan said the committee had decided to invoke Section 67 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007 under which undertakings could be given by the doctors not to repeat the conduct complained of and no finding of professional misconduct would be made against them.
Patrick Leonard, barrister for the medical council’s chief executive officer, objected, saying it would be “very unusual” to invoke Section 67 at such a late stage in a serious case which was “calling out for” the imposition of sanctions.
But Kevin Cross, legal adviser to the fitness to practise committee, said it was open to the committee to hear the bulk of the evidence before taking this step.
Dr Monaghan said the committee was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the conduct complained of amounted to professional misconduct. There were “a series of catastrophic errors” in the case “but we were not satisfied these represented a malicious intention or that the category of professional misconduct was an appropriate way to deal with this tragic outcome,” he said.
The case centred on the wrongful removal of a healthy kidney from a now eight-year-old boy in March 2008, leaving him with a right kidney with 9 per cent functionality. Evidence was given that the boys’ parents asked hospital staff on at least four occasions to double check which kidney was to be removed before he was brought to theatre.
Prof Corbally and Dr Paran each gave three undertakings to the fitness to practise committee before the case halted – not to undertake surgery again without reviewing X-rays, not to delegate work to other doctors without ensuring they were prepared and trained, and to prepare a joint written guide for the medical council within 12 months on the lessons learned from this case.
As the case ended the boy’s parents stressed lessons had to be learned but the two doctors did not comment. This is understood to be one of the first times Section 67 has been invoked.