A most unusual trial is going on in the High Court at the moment. We have all become used to the spectacle of patients suing doctors for supposed incompetence and negligence, but this may be the first time that a doctor has ever sued a patient on the same grounds. What is claimed by Dr Fellowes, the doctor in question, is that - but perhaps it would be simpler just to bring you an extract from court proceedings and let you see for yourself.
We join the trial just at the moment when Dr Fellowes, the plaintiff, has first taken the stand.
Counsel: Your name is Joshua Fellowes?
Doctor: That is the name by which I am known, yes.
Counsel: Then it is your name?
Doctor: Not necessarily.
Counsel: Explain to me how the name by which you are known is not necessarily your name.
Doctor: My father was a doctor, as I became after him. He therefore had very bad handwriting. When he wrote my name in the registry book, he thought he was writing "Jonathan", which was the name he had chosen for me, but it looked much more like Joshua, and that is how it was transcribed to my birth certificate. Thus, although for a while my family did call me Jonathan, my official name was Joshua and that is the one that took over.
Counsel: Do you expect me to believe that story?
Doctor: I have no expectations in the matter one way or the other. I have no previous experience of your credulity.
Counsel: I see. Is it true, then, that all doctors have bad handwriting?
Doctor: Oh, yes. Mark you, you should see the handwriting of the average pharmacist. It's diabolical.
Counsel: And you are Dr Joshua Fellowes?
Doctor: I am now, yes.
Counsel: What do you mean, you are now?
Doctor: I didn't use to be Dr Fellowes.
Counsel: When was that?
Doctor: Before I qualified as a doctor.
Judge: Just a moment, just a moment! May I ask what is going on here, Mr Matchless? This is more like a music hall routine than a trial!
Counsel: It is a battle of verbal dexterity, my Lord. In time-honoured legal tradition, I am trying to browbeat him with inane questions, and he is trying to confuse me with facetious answers.
Judge: I see. And who is winning?
Counsel: Neck and neck at the moment, m'lud.
Judge: I see. Let me know when we've got a winner. Carry on.
Counsel: Now, Dr Fellowes, you are bringing a case for medical negligence against one of your patients, are you not?
Doctor: I certainly am.
Counsel: A certain Mrs Wilma Armstrong?
Doctor: That is the name she goes under.
Counsel: When you say that is the name she goes under, do you mean...? Well, never mind. When did Mrs Armstrong last come to you for treatment?
Doctor: Last July.
Counsel: And what was wrong with her?
Doctor: Wrong with her? Well, since you ask, she is lazy, self-deceiving, selfish, greedy, demanding, ugly...
Counsel: Dr Fellowes! I mean, what was wrong with her, medically speaking?
Doctor: Nothing.
Counsel: Then why had she come to see you?
Doctor: Because she is lazy, self-deceiving, selfish...
Counsel: But surely, Dr Fellowes, that is not a medical condition?
Doctor: No, but it leads to a medical condition. Mrs Armstrong is one of those patients who refuse to look after themselves. She smokes, over-eats, takes no exercise, and so on, and then when the medical consequences catch up with her, she comes to me for treatment. I explain to her that her recovery lies in her own hands. She refuses to listen to me, and expects to be cured by pills. She cannot be cured by pills, only by reforming her lifestyle. Her story is the same as that of many British people. For too long the doctors of this country have been expected to put back on their feet people who got there through their own neglect! Now, at last, I am making a stand and suing a patient for medical negligence, that is to say, the neglect of their own welfare!
Great cheering from the public gallery. Shouts of "Attaboy!" and "For he's a jolly good Fellowes!". Waving of banners and flags, etc
Judge: What is the meaning of this outburst?
Man in Court: We are the provisional wing of the BMA, my Lord. We have come to cheer our man on.
Judge: Well, you won 't do it in my court, my bully boys. One more cheep out of you and I'll have you ejected by the hard men of the High Court, all ex-night club bouncers, each one of them, and trained to inflict injuries which baffle all the top doctors. Carry on, Mr Matchless.
More of this exceedingly topical court case tomorrow, I hope, when Mrs Armstrong attempts to enter the witness stand.
The Independent Wed May 21 03
Yesterday I brought you part of an epoch-making trial in which a doctor is suing a patient for medical negligence. Yes, Dr Fellowes maintains that if only his patient, Mrs Armstrong, had looked after herself better, she would not be wasting his time today. The case has aroused such interest among doctors and malingerers alike that I am bringing you more today, starting with the first appearance in court of the accused patient, Mrs Wilma Armstrong.
Counsel: Mrs Armstrong, you are accused of medical negligence by Dr Fellowes . . .
Defendant: Well, he's a fine one to talk! Negligence, indeed! I go to him with my complaints and all he does is criticise me! I should get out more, he says. I should give up smoking. I should eat less. That's not what a doctor is meant to do, just be negative and destructive, and ruin your social life! A doctor's meant to cure you, not boss you about!
Counsel: The point is that . . .
Defendant: I've bent over backwards to try to help him. Take this thing about exercise. Now, my Uncle Joe was struck by a lorry when he was out jogging, so how he can say that exercise is good for you, I don't know, but I thought I would humour him and go along with what he said, so I said to him, Doctor, I don't really have time to go out for long walks about the place, but I tell you what, if you can give me some pills which will make me want to take exercise, I'll take them and we'll see if they work.
Counsel: The point is . . .
Defendant: But would he? No, he wouldn't! Said there weren't any such things. Well, of course there are such things! People are taking them all the time! They're always advertising them on TV! Just drink this and you'll have more energy, do more things, they say! And all the top athletes take them! You read about it all the time! They're all taking drugs and medication to make them run faster, go further and leap higher, so you'd think the least he could do would be to let me have a little of whatever it is they're taking so it will make me take some exercise. Not a bit of it! Bit of will power, that's all it takes, he says. All you need is will power. Will power! How does he think I got to the surgery in the first place? It's no picnic getting there, I can tell you. First of all, I have to get the 39 bus . . .
Counsel: Yes, but what the court wants to know is . . .
Defendant: And what the doctor says doesn't make sense. Eat less, he says. Give up smoking, he says. But everyone knows that smoking takes away your appetite! If I gave up smoking, my appetite would come back and I'd only eat more! Where's the sense in that? For a doctor, he doesn't seem to know much about the human body. And another thing. Exercise makes you hungry. If I go on the long walks he wants me to go on, what am I going to do? Replace that lost energy by eating more! Put on more weight! You see, he doesn't make sense. And then he accuses me of negligence! I've a good mind to counter-sue for sheer barefaced cheek !
Counsel: MRS ARMSTRONG ! !
Defendant: Yes?
Counsel: We are not here to listen to your monologue! The way this court works is that I ask you a question, and you give me the answer. Then you wait for another question.
Defendant: Fair enough.
Counsel: Now, Mrs Armstrong, I believe the last time you went to Dr Fellowes, you were complaining of bad knees . . .
Defendant: I'll say I was! They were causing me agony! First one, then the other. Such aches and pains. I could hardly walk. He said, the reason for this was that I was loading too much weight on them. Weight? I said. You think I go round the house carrying heavy loads? I'm not well enough to carry heavy things! No, no, no, he said, I mean your own weight, your knees aren't well enough to carry your own weight. The cheek! Look, I said, that might be true if I did a lot of standing up, but most of the time I'm sitting down, taking the weight off my legs, so what's he talking about? And if he wants me to take more exercise, what's that but giving my knees more of a load? You see . . .
In the public interest, we are drawing a veil over the rest of this trial. But remember, the average doctor has to put up with this mental cruelty from patients all the time. The next time you go to your doctor, give the poor chap a break. And if in doubt, don't go at all. This trial was sponsored by the "Better Patients Means Better Doctors" Campaign.
The Independent Thurs May 22nd 03
But there was more…
Evidence is now beginning to emerge that the government bases some of its policies on this very column. This week they announced that they are considering legislation to oblige patients to follow doctor's orders. On the 21st of last month I brought you part of a trial in which a doctor was actually suing a patient for medical negligence precisely because the patient refused to obey the doctor and would not adopt a healthy lifestyle? Coincidence, or what?
By great good luck that trial is still continuing, so let's have another extract from it. A couple of days ago, the doctor, Dr Joshua Fellowes, was up on the stand being questioned by the opposition . . .
Counsel: Now, Dr Fellowes, we have heard you tell the court that you recommended Mrs Armstrong to drink less and exercise more. And give up smoking.
Fellowes: I did, yes. But she ignored me.
Counsel: Do you smoke, Dr Fellowes?
Fellowes: No, I do not.
Counsel: When did you give up?
Fellowes: About six months ago.
Counsel: In time for you to be a non-smoker at this trial?
Fellowes: There was no connection.
Counsel: How long have you known that smoking is bad for you?
Fellowes: Since my student days.
Counsel: Which were twenty years ago. And yet you were still smoking six months ago?
Fellowes: Well . . .
Counsel: Do you drink?
Fellowes: I take the occasional glass of wine.
Counsel: Do you take the occasional bottle of wine?
Fellowes: On a very festive occasion I might get through a bottle.
Counsel: Dr Fellowes, as an examining doctor, are you aware that when asked to state their normal consumption of alcohol, the average punter understates it by at least two-thirds?
Fellowes: Yes, I . . .
Counsel: So you drink quite a lot of wine?
Fellowes: Yes, I suppose I do.
Counsel: Are you aware that excessive drinking among doctors is quite common? That doctors are high suicide risks? And that many doctors smoke? And take drugs?
Fellowes: I believe that may well be . . .
Counsel: How much exercise do you take, Dr Fellowes?
Fellowes: Enough.
Counsel: Indeed? We have heard how your patient, the defendant, Mrs Armstrong, has to get to your surgery by bus and on foot. How do you get there, Dr Fellowes?
Fellowes: I drive.
Counsel: There is a doctor's parking space reserved for you?
Fellowes: Yes.
Counsel: Not much exercise there, then. So how DO you get your exercise?
Fellowes: I bend over backwards to follow government guidelines.
Laughter in court. The judge uses his gavel to produce silence.
Judge: There will be no laughter in court unless I make the joke! Carry on, Mr Matchless.
Counsel: Thank you, m'lud. Now, Dr Fellowes, sketch out for us the average amount of exercise you get in a day.
Fellowes: Well, I play golf once a fortnight . . .
Counsel: So that's an average of a hole of golf a day ...
Fellowes: I walk to the pub of an evening ...
Counsel: More drinking ....
Fellowes: I do some sailing ...
Counsel: More drinking . . .
Fellowes: I am a keen gardener.
Counsel: Though not so keen, perhaps, as your gardener Mr Stringer, who does three full days a week on your property?
Fellowes: Yes, he . . .
Counsel: Leaving very little for you to do?
Judge: Mr Matchless, you seem to be giving Dr Fellowes a bit of a hard time here. Is there a reason for that?
Counsel: Yes, m'lud. I am trying to get him to admit that doctors are as hopeless as their patients. I am also attempting to raise his blood pressure till he has a mild seizure of some kind, which will give me the chance to shout out: "Is there a doctor in the house?", thus getting a cheap laugh at his expense.
Judge: Excellent! I shall look forward to that. Carry on.
MORE OF THIS SOME OTHER TIME.
The Independent Friday June 6 03