Compliance, operational and expertise risks in practice management, social care, occupational health intermediation, insurance underwriting, etc vs ME

InfiniteRubix

InfiniteRubix

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
"Unmanaged post-viral disease risks and rising pandemic exposure - Compliance, operational and expertise risks in practice management, social care, occupational health intermediation, insurance underwriting, claims management and reinsurance (draft)"

https://richardramyar.com/pro-bono-publico/51-me-cfs-medical-education-liability-indemnity.html

"This post is a live draft and will contain errors - any feedback regarding typos or grammatical mistakes will be gratefully received.

I cannot engage in discussion regarding the general nature of the content or how it may apply to individual situations. Unlike my other work, it is not in "journal" format. The references are not structured that way (and are a bit messy for now). The use of 'callout quotes' to emphasis key points is not consistently applied throughout the guide yet. "
 
Last edited:
This document provides health and social care providers and practitioners, insurance underwriters and reinsurers, claims management firms, intermediary agencies, litigators and related organisations with information regarding unmanaged and growing risks from specific, widely evidenced and normalised medical error and malpractice. Examples are given that demonstrate the roles of legal and policy requirements versus normalised unlawful clinical judgement (the unlawful nature of not assuming initial eligibility of ME/CFS for 1) the NHS flu vaccination programme and 2) Group 6 covid vaccination scheme status). Tests for clinical judgement lawfulness are also outlined. Principles contained therein are generalisable by third parties to different scenarios that are driven by equivalent factors.

The empirical improbability that a clinician’s judgement can be assumed safe, appropriate or lawful versus ME/CFS is also shown. This leads to the generalisable obligation to procure compliant education and other legal obligations, derived from multiple statutory risks and regulatory imperatives determined by the General Medical Council (GMC) and the Care Quality Commission (CQC)(link).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Outline

-Unmanaged compliance and operational risk accumulation - assessment and mitigation
-Medico-legal status, requirements and enforcement
-Legal obligations on service providers vs current risk generation
- Liability, malpractice and indemnification
Click to expand...
 
"It is the foundation of a different approach, which addresses the growing risks to medics themselves, their organisations and their insurance, along with specific mechanisms of concern they must manage versus us."
 
Unmanaged post-viral disease risks and rising pandemic exposure

(Updated with addition of version history)

"Post-viral disease is an undermined field of risk assessment, pricing, budgeting, compliance management, reputation management, liability generation and discrimination. Elevated probability of unlawful clinical judgement and/or administrative decision-making in this field pervades clinical and therapeutic services and related contracting parties. Risks are routinely misjudged and exacerbated. "

"Medico-legal issues, requirements and enforcement factors are discussed. Legal obligations on service providers versus current risk generation are then outlined, along with their impacts on liability, malpractice-risk and indemnification. Risk-mitigation measures are offered throughout and are followed by compliant education resources.

This pre-released draft is specifically not structured for scientific audiences and will receive ongoing updates.

Communication of factual or typographical errata or other suggestions is welcome."

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/pand...alomyelitis-activity-6799785407891427328-OgXJ

Image Credit: Weiss & Paarz Medical Malpractice Attorneys

#LongCovid #covid #MyalgicEncephalomyelitis #MECFS #riskmanagement #medicaleducation #doctors #insuranceindustry #underwriting #claimsmanagement #practicemanagement #generalpractice #physiotherapists #covid19impacts
 
Risks from the following factors are routinely misjudged and exacerbated by normalised procurement of fallacious services or testimony:

Clinical judgement, administrative decision making, policy formulation or policy implementation that fail to meet the requirements of the law are not lawful by definition and carry risk

Claims that do not meet the thresholds of scientific probity, rigour and/or process cannot be described as science and are thus legally unsustainable and carry risk (regardless even of partial or total contradiction by bodies of work that are sufficiently substantive)

Clinical judgement or administrative decision making that depends on such claims cannot therefore sustain claims of lawlulness and carry risk

Education or organisational policies that encourage otherwise and carry risk, by directly cultivating unlawful behaviour, versus statutory provisions, duties of care, policy and regulation
Click to expand...
 
"Initial assumption of ME/CFS eligibility for covid vaccination in the Group 6 cohort is not a function of clinical discretion. To not include ME/CFS patients in Group 6 for covid vaccination is unavoidably unlawful"
 
Summary on Twitter:


The relative lack of interest in this topic is counterproductively surreal and disturbing. We have become chronically used to persistent lawbreaking and aggressive insistence on malpractice. Neither medics, associations nor bodies of state define the law. Not your GP, not the RCGP, not the BMA, not NICE, not Cochrane nor the CDC.

The lack of interest continues the community's misdiagnoses of the nature of power and control in our context, playing the game on the wrong terms, terms that are entirely defined by the fallacious malfeasants.

Ignoring this ignores the underlying fundamental factor that defines everyday conversations with medics, the NICE process, the CDC process, Cochrane review, Swedish parliamentary sessions, etc. Literally everything. All those processes exists within the limits of the law and do not define what is lawful. Full stop.

The sooner we realise that, the sooner we have realised the primary truth that is inconvenient to the lawbreakers and their facilitators.

Our response is all too often to persuade or educate, only. This is very appropriate where there is no bad faith, not where there is persistence or insistence. I understand. We tend to stick to the persuasion for a fear of upsetting people or being accused of "activism". But this is a mix of accepting 1) bastardized terms of engagement defined by the "the opposition" and 2) it often veers into beaten wife syndrome, frankly. Our fear is irrelevant to the law.

Our relative lack of interest is disturbing.
 
Last edited:
An appropriate example of dealing with the illiterate on this basis (PG in this case):

"Legally unsustainable, which your peers have zero control over

Science shoots the message when methods violate basic standards / messenger veers into weak sophistry

Reducing the definition of science towards illiteracy to excuse rampant malpractice was never appropriate @rcgp"

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom