An unfounded complaint from a colleague left a dentist in a ‘cold, dark and lonely place’ and forced her to step back from her role as NHS clinical adviser.
A dentist sought Dental Defence Union (DDU) support following a baseless ‘blue-on-blue’ complaint.
This comes after a fellow colleague made the complaint to NHS England which concerned multiple contractual and clinical issues, but contained no evidence.
The complaint and subsequent investigation was said to be ‘very stressful’ for the dentist. The investigation lasted for three years and impacted her physical and mental health as a result. She had sleepless nights and, at one point, considered taking her own life.
The complaints made against her were eventually all dismissed. In addition, it was found to be ‘a vexatious whistleblowing complaint’ with ‘no evidence to support the allegations made’.
Despite this, the three-year investigation left her ‘in a cold, dark and lonely place’.
Dentistry’s top stories
Derogatory comments and rolled eyes
The senior dentist had an unblemished 35-year professional career, including a long-standing practice partnership, training programme director for HEE and clinical adviser for NHS England.
In the latest edition of the DDU journal, she discusses the support that the DDU and British Dental Association (BDA) provided for her throughout the process.
In the journal, she recounts that she had recently took over an established high street NHS dental practice to be closer to her elderly parents.
She also states that the practice needed a lot of work to reach CQC standards and that she made an effort to create a sense of stability and supportive environment for existing staff. This included allowing the former practice principal to stay on for three years.
Despite this, the dentist said ‘from the get-go, the animosity was like nothing I had experienced in my life’. This included daily microaggressions, rolled eyes and derogatory comments. As well as this, the former practice principal would exclude the new members of staff from daily huddles.
Following this, two of her associates left, and the remaining two handed in their notice. As well as this, a few months into taking over the practice, CQC inspectors visited the practice following concerns. The practice was found to be fully compliant after a follow-up inspection.
However, by this time, she was made aware of the complaint made by her colleague to NHS England.
‘Angry and upset’
Following the complaint, the dentist was asked to step back from her role as an NHS clinical adviser to allow the complaint to be investigated.
She said: ‘I was angry and upset, but I decided it was going to be business because I was a professional and wasn’t going to stoop to that level’.
But 18 months on from the complaint, she had not received an update on the investigation, leaving her ‘in the wilderness’.
As a result she contacted, Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS), then the BDA and the DDU. Together, the bodies supported her with the contractual and clinical performance strands of the complaint.
Two years after the complaint, she was asked to submit 120 patient records for review.
‘To scrutinise that many records at once is unheard of’, she said. ‘I’d been accused of everything but the kitchen sink, from making fraudulent NHS claims to failing to make the right diagnosis, but after going through 1,000 documents over three months, they found no evidence for any of the allegations.
‘That was what my DDU adviser had predicted and reaffirmed what I knew all along, but of course that didn’t make the process any easier.’
Invaluable support
Her DDU adviser helped her prepare her response to the Performance Advisory Group (PAG) which she found ‘invaluable’.
‘I knew what they would be looking for, but it was key to have another pair of eyes because I think my anger and frustration were probably coming through.
‘This was the first time I had needed the DDU for anything more than dentolegal advice since I joined in my final year at dental school and I had really fantastic support.’
Leo Briggs, deputy head of the DDU said: ‘Despite the positive outcome for our member, it cannot be overlooked that the complaint and subsequent investigation took more than two years to reach a conclusion and this was undoubtedly stressful for the member.
‘At the DDU, we guide, support and defend members and as part of that we act in their best interests and safeguard their professional reputations.
‘We put our members at the heart of decisions about how their case is managed.’
Click here to read the full DDU journal.
Follow Dentistry.co.uk on Instagram to keep up with all the latest dental news and trends.
