What a convoluted article.

Drawing a comparison between this Doctor, the Bali bombers and the murderers of Anita is really stretching it.

Maybe this doctor contributed "in some cases barely indirectly caused the death of very close to 500 Australian women -"

However I do not know what the evidence shows, but if it is true that he indirectly caused the deaths of 500 women. I some how find it impossible to beleive that this doctor would have been allowed to practice for so long if he was indirectly contribuiting to the deaths of 500 women.

The author then brings up the subject of Jack the Ripper who mutilated his victims and that Jack was protected because he may have been a royal, (this is pure speculation)and then compare this doctor and alleging that this doctor is protected,

Come on!

OLO your standards are falling.

Like JamesH, I find this article a bit over the top. For one thing, the case has not yet gone through the court so much of this is currently sub judice. Also, what I do know about this case has come from the media, including a feature in the Weekend Australian earlier this year that did go into harrowing detail. It was Channel 9's Sunday program that first revealed the story back in February. There have been regular updates as the story has unfolded. This does not indicate that the media are shunning this story because they want to keep it from public view or because it is too horrible to relate. The author comes across as a bit paranoid and her language is quite gothic, detracting from the credibility of the piece.

The subject warrants comment but such purple prose as this has limited appeal, not to mention clarity.

This is the first time I understood that the Butcher of Bega had removed external organs of reproduction upto 500 times.

You have to ask
- why didn't the operating theatre staff report him
- why did the hospital allow him to do this more than once
- why didn't Medicare step in, he was either using fraudulent procedure numbers or had higher than normal excision of genitalia than normal doctors

His patients have been poorly served by him, the nursing staff, the hospital administration and the government funding authorities with oversight for health care.

The purple prose obscured the fact that women are still subjected to a misogynistic health care system.

Gothic purple prose seems appropriate to me in the context of grisly, grotesque gothic-esque acts - if some people find it difficult I would observe that the author's point is being proven by almost all such commentators excruciated responses i.e. whatever keeps you in denial and prevents you from getting transfixed by the horror, the horror! For the true unbelievers that there really could be 500 victims as the author claims there are, why not log on to the latest news - 700 women have reported assault by Reeves as of today: http://www.livenews.com.au/articles/2008/02/26/Calls_for_private_investigation_into_sexually_mutilating_doctor.
Inanna

The point of having a court system is to test allegations there. If the system works properly, this person will be dealt with. At present we have allegations, shocking ones to be sure. Declining to fall into hysteria does not indicate a lack of compassion or ability to be transfixed by the horror. To read into a more measured response some sort of process of denial and desire to push the story into the background is absurd. The fact that we know about the allegations at all is because the media has reported them. Constructing a media conspiracy around this case seems ill-founded. The strongest cases are often best made in simple language. Turning the page purple only alienates people.

LizT Reeves shouldn't be in court because there are 500 to 700 victims. He should have been stopped before he harmed a dozen women. He did not act on his own, there must have been anthaetists, nurses in the operating theatre or delivery suite watching his actions. They should have spoken up. The Department of Health and Medibank provide oversight into how the federal government spends the tax dollar on health care. Each procedure that is paid for has a different procedure number. Clearly they were asleep also. I mean how many excisions of external genitalia of adult females occur in Australia each year? A dozen?

JamesH found it all a bit too much and perhaps exaggerated.How would James feel if he had gone in for a routine operation and female Doctor removed the glans or top of his penis for fun?

Perhaps James counts removal of female genitals of being a lower order of magnitude,after all,their prime function is to have babies.Perhaps it is Sharia James Mohommad in disguise.

Firstly the author of this is demented! At least I hope so as she should be prosecuted for trying to influence the upcommingcase and dementia could be her only defence.
Doctors stick together, surgeons stick together. They will not dob each other in. Health Burecrats are totally useless as they are so so lazy!
What we need is to take the granting of medical licences and also the granting of legal qualifications from the Doctors and Lawyers. Just because they have shown their intelligence in specific areas does not mean any more than that!
Put them under a court and exclude Doctors and Lawyers from it and then when they behave "Inapropriately" they should be treated like anyone else would be for lying, cheating, stealing and visiting violence on others.

See this all has to do with the set up for complaint handling.

Even if a patient did complain what would happen is that the complaint would be sent to the hospital and given to the deviant. The deviant would then write a submission/reply that is full of lies and say that the procedure was justified and done professionally. I mean other nurses and doctors would say something if it wasn't done right - right!. Then this submission/reply would be sent back and then accepted and forwarded on as the truth and the matter would be closed - for good. Never to be re-opened again.

The complaint handling person would then send a letter to the complainant saying what they were advised and saying that they hope this satisfies the enquiry. Any further complaints about the issue are ignored or just sent a copy of what has already been prepared, said and done and you can go on a bureaucratic merry go round if you try to get justice and procedural fairness or even some rights.

That is how the system works. Because nothing is investigated or substantiated complaints are not added up so essentially they can do harm to a many people as they like until somebody internally speaks up.

Education – Keeping them Honest
http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/
Our children deserve better

Arjay,

extreme caution needs to be applied to what the media reports. A few years ago I had inside knowledge about a story that was published in the media.

What was reported by the media, was actually very different to what the actual facts were. Apart from the names of people involved, the details and story that were published in the media was totally different to the details I knew to be fact.

I am not defending the behaviour of this doctor, if the allegations are true! and there is no doubt in my mind that there are doctors who are practicing that should not be allowed too.

This author if she wanted to make her points and to support her arguement, needed to bring out the case histories of the women involved.

She failed to do this, instead she deliberately tries to inflame the emotiveness by comparing this doctor to Jack the ripper (who I understand really did mutilate the bodies of his victims) and the bali bombers.

It has been assumed that Jack the ripper was either a doctor or a royal, who was protected. Now this may or may not be true. But without factual evidence this is pure speculation.

Talking about genital mutilation, when Loreen Bobbit cut her partners penis off, many of my female colleagues would make fun and jokes about this.

I do not think that genital mutilation of a male or female is something that one should make jokes about.

I am not even sure we should be discussing this, as the case has yet to be tried and I would hate to think that some of my actions could lead to a delay in proceedings. However, I expect that Graham Young has vetted the article and found it to be OK.

I agree with James H and LizT in that the author is over the top and paranoid. She states that the accused has contributed to the deaths of 500 women. Now I find that a bit hard to accept the accuracy of that. I read elsewhere that there have now been 500- 700 complaints about his procedural conduct, but many of these could be for other matters than genitial mutilation. If a court had any evidence that someone contributed to the deaths of 500, I cannot see the accused making bail.

Having read the other article by this author, it seems to me that she has a chip on her shoulder that men get a better deal in the media than women. I dont believe that.

I am content to leave further comment until after the case is heard.

JamesH - why is a report only credible if it follows the current journalistic fashion of personalising the story through the provision of a few case histories?

billie,

this author is suppose to be a university lecturer. The above article is not of the quality one would expect from a university lecturer.

Secondly she introduces other characters in this article in a fashion similarly used by fire and brimestone preachers.

<some cases barely indirectly caused the death of very close to 500 Australian women>

I do not find it credible to think that if this doctor did the above, he would have been allowed to continue to practice, let alone not be gaoled.

If he did contribute the deaths of 500 women, it would mean, he is perhaps the biggest mass murderer in the world.

The media journalists also at times will employ similar techniques designed to get the viewers on their side. Using an emotional hook, that bypass rational. logical thinking. In other words suckering people.