Content Sections
Every person needs to have the balanced, evidence-based information necessary to give fully informed consent for any medical intervention that is recommended to them, most especially ones that are given to healthy individuals.- Dr Jayne Donegan
Dr Jayne Donegan has been a lifeline for many parents in the UK who question the necessity and safety of childhood vaccines for many years. She has also been a longtime friend of us here at ANH. Through her regular lectures and talks she has sought to safeguard children's health by providing information about the risks associated with childhood vaccines that help to counter mainstream 'propaganda' that declares all vaccines to be safe and effective so ignoring any possibility of risk.
Having qualified as a doctor in the 1980s, Dr Donegan went on to study homeopathy and naturopathy in the 1990s as she sought an antidote to the focus on disease management in the mainstream healthcare systems.
In 2002, she was asked to be an expert witness in a court case by two mothers who were contesting their ex-partners attempts to force vaccination on their children. Following the court case Dr Donegan was accused of serious professional misconduct by the UK's General Medical Council (GMC) in an attempt to remove her licence to practise. After three years the panel found in Dr Donegan's favour, stating she had been objective, independent and unbiased. In recent years Dr Donegan gave up practising as a GP to work as a homeopath and naturopath as she could no longer adhere to the requirement to put NHS policy before the best interests of her patients. She attempted to deregister as a doctor on multiple occasions, however the GMC had other ideas and refused all her applications.
Her most recent ordeal at the hands of the GMC began in 2019 when she was 'outed' for her advice to parents by undercover journalists, which led the then Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, to call for her to be investigated after he declared "Vaccines save lives - the science is beyond doubt. Anyone who claims otherwise is wilfully risking lives." Thus began what Dr Donegan called a politically motivated show trial, which took place last week.
Click here to access the 'charge sheet' against Dr Donegan.
The verdict of the hearing was delivered this week, which found her to be guilty of just 1 of the 8 charges brought against her, one of giving "one-sided advice on vaccines". For this 'crime' she has been struck off and another scalp has been claimed by the GMC to wave as discouragement to other doctors who may wish to speak out against mainstream medical advice or pharma or vaccine propaganda.
Dr Donegan submitted an 80 page defence brief, but boycotted the hearing on the grounds that it was a 'political show trial'. Following the verdict she was unapologetic saying being struck off is a small price to pay for protecting the safety of children. She said “I’m delighted… that after years of trying to get off the GMC register, I have finally achieved this. The worst possible outcome would be 10 more years of compulsory registration.”
At the end of the day, Dr Jayne Donegan has won by refusing to engage in a witch hunt that served no purpose other than to hold her up as a warning to others that may also choose to speak out. Her ethical stance is an inspiration to all who know her. She reminds us there is another way and that not all doctors have ridden roughshod over the ethics they should uphold at all times or foregone their pledge to avoid maleficence and 'First do no harm'!
>>> FEATURE: Medical ethics – our best chance of restoring distorted health systems?
'Being struck off by a corrupt GMC is a small the price to pay for taking a lawful ethical stand for the safety of British children."
Statement by Dr Jayne Donegan following GMC Hearing
DEFIANT VACCINE SAFETY DOCTOR CONDEMNS MATT HANCOCK'S 'CORRUPT' GMC SHOW TRIAL AFTER YESTERDAY'S BMA 'NO CONFIDENCE' VOTE
Dr Donegan says: "The British Medical Association is correct to declare yesterday no confidence in the GMC."
“I boycotted the GMC's political show trial against me which ended today. Serious irregularities include bogus dishonesty charges and bogus accusations that I put newborns at risk of serious harm. I'm also not being struck off for my opinions on vaccination. This is the second time in 16 years these have been confirmed 'correct'. In 2007 the GMC was forced by overwhelming evidence to concede my opinions on vaccination were 'correct'. The 2007 charges were thrown out.
While there are doctors who act unprofessionally, do not follow the GMC guidance on the Duties of a Doctor nor the Law on Consent [Montgomery 2015], my 'impairment' is the alleged 'misconduct' and 'lack of insight' that I support the right of every parent to do whatever is necessary to access timely and appropriate medical care for their children.
When all doctors act like professionals parents won’t have to.
Being struck off by a corrupt GMC is a small the price to pay for taking a lawful ethical stand for the safety of British children.
I'm delighted my opinions are still 'correct' and that after years of trying to get off the GMC register I have finally achieved this. The worst possible outcome would be ten more years of compulsory registration!
I will be continuing my lectures so the public can get the information they need to make informed decisions about vaccination, information they do not get from the NHS.
NOTES FOR EDITORS
Of 8 charges today's GMC's tribunal decision is based on only one: Charge 8: "You made statements which encouraged parents to deliberately misinform healthcare professionals about their children’s immunisation status".
The GMC's hearing panel accepted for the record uncontested evidence correcting several of the Tribunal's findings.
Dr Donegan's 80 page response to the GMC charges is attached.
For her robust medical ethical position as a doctor in response to Charge 8 - see pages 61-72 D. Parents misleading health professionals – no wonder
Since 2016 Dr Donegan's wish to be removed from the GMC register including repeated application were thwarted by the GMC insisting she remain whilst investigating repeated bogus complaints. Now finally she can go and without having to fill in any more forms or bureaucracy.
The GMC have achieved:
- striking off a Doctor whose professional medical opinions are now twice over confirmed in legal proceedings to be correct thanks to them;
- for her ethical stand as a doctor against them: that was in supporting the right of parents to do whatever is necessary to get British kids timely and appropriate healthcare because too many doctors are abusive to unvaccinated children and their parents;
- they lost on all the other allegations and she won without turning up to a single second of the hearing;
- they have struck off a doctor who has been trying since 2016 to get off the register - hip hoorah for them.
Comments
your voice counts
Christine Standing
07 July 2023 at 12:27 pm
My heart and my righteous indignation go out to Dr. Donegan. My own excellent doctor, Dr Sarah Myhill suffered the same fate.
I want to do some research before saying more, but I believe it was High Court judge, Justice Mitting, who had been hearing the case of a colleague of Dr Andrew Wakefield who said that the GMC is not fit for purpose. The British Medical Journal (BMJ) reported on the case of Professor Walker-Smith accused of : "serious professional misconduct and (the GMC who) struck him off the medical register in 2010 was dealing with a task that was “beyond it,” his barrister told the High Court in London this week."
The BMJ reported, "GMC case against Wakefield’s colleague was “superficial,” says appeal" (Professor Walker-Smith lost his licence to practise in May 2010 along with Dr Andrew Wakefield, who led the research.)
"Stephen Miller QC told Mr Justice Mitting at the start of a two week appeal hearing that the panel ignored evidence that paediatric gastroenterologists at the Royal Free Hospital in London, headed by Professor Walker-Smith, were carrying out investigations that were clinically indicated and undertaken for the purposes of diagnosis and treatment and not for a research project." So the GMC can't understand plain English and I agree with Justice Mitting who said, allegedly, that the GMC is "not fit for purpose". Mr Justice Mitting criticised the disciplinary panel’s ‘inadequate and superficial reasoning’ and ‘wrong conclusions’ before ruling: ‘The panel’s determination cannot stand. I therefore quash it.’
He called for such cases to be overseen by someone with ‘judicial experience’ in future. Has that happened? What steps has the GMC taken to avoid further inadequate and superficial reasoning?
I speak as a patient of the Royal Free Hospital, awaiting urgent spinal treatment, the appointment for which is taking three months! Can the NHS afford to lose good doctors?
Your voice counts
We welcome your comments and are very interested in your point of view, but we ask that you keep them relevant to the article, that they be civil and without commercial links. All comments are moderated prior to being published. We reserve the right to edit or not publish comments that we consider abusive or offensive.
There is extra content here from a third party provider. You will be unable to see this content unless you agree to allow Content Cookies. Cookie Preferences