Linda de caestecker biography of william

Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info. A whistleblower who raised concerns about infection risks at a flagship hospital was not criticised in order to "deflect" attention from real issues, a former director at NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has told a public inquiry.

Dr Linda de Caestecker, who was director of public health at the health board until her retirement in March , was asked at the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry on Tuesday about the handling of a number of whistleblowing complaints brought by members of staff regarding patient safety at the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital QEUH campus in Glasgow.

She was asked why her own investigation into one of the complaints, which was completed in May , found fault with Dr Christine Peters, who was one of the microbiologists who blew the whistle about issues including the ventilation and water systems at the new hospital.

Linda de caestecker biography of william: Linda de Caestecker's 4 research works

Dr de Caestecker's report of her investigation, which was shown to the inquiry, contained a "long list" of criticisms of Dr Peters's behaviour, including that "she does not accept being part of a team" and "she sends frequent requests for updates which are not directly relevant to her role". The report concluded "concerns about ventilation and patient safety were real" and were being dealt with, before going on to say Dr Peters had to "accept that she has no role in the day-to-day management", and "she should be asked to cease sending multiple emails".

Counsel to the inquiry Fred Mackintosh KC put it Dr de Caestecker that the criticisms formed a "significant part" of the report despite not being "relevant" to the concerns the whistleblowers had raised. She insisted they were relevant as during her investigation the criticisms had come out "very strongly" from people she interviewed.

Dr de Caestecker continued: "People were very distressed and emotional at the interviews when they talked about it, and were finding it very difficult, so I felt I had to report it in order that we could put some help and support in place. When asked whether any "significant issue" raised up to that point by Dr Peters about infection risk at the new hospital had subsequently been found to be inaccurate, she said she was not aware of any.