Individuals who should have behaved differentlyBMJ 2001; 323 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7306.182 (Published 28 July 2001) Cite this as: BMJ 2001;323:182
- Clare Dyer, legal correspondent
The report concludes there were individuals who, in the view of the inquiry, could and should on occasions have behaved differently. It singled out several people for specific criticism.
James Wisheart: “lacked insight” and would not admit that his own results were poor. He misled the trust board, his management style was perceived as “autocratic,” and he was part of the “club culture which fostered a sense of them and us.”
John Roylance: was criticised for “an inappropriate degree of rigidity,” for not …
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial