Robs dentist is back in court to have a review of his one year supervision order.I was asked if i would like to comment on him being returned to full practise and i have posted my reply. This man got off way to lightly and he is about to carry on as if nothing happened.I wish it was that easy!!!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------
"When my husband attended Mr. Dhamecha�s dental practice he was entitled too expect the best treatment and advice available from the information he provided.
Despite him telling Mr. Dhamecha that he had had a sore on his tongue for several weeks and his denture being unwearable because it was broken Mr. Dhamecha diagnosed the ulcer as traumatic. When the new denture was fitted Robin was told to return if it gave him any problem. He was not told to return if the ulcer did not heal and he was not given a further appointment for the dentist to check on it, as I believe he should have been.

In the committees ruling it was decided that it was quite acceptable for Mr. Dhamecha to assume the ulcer was traumatic and it was also decided that due to his previous good record and the testimonials of a few satisfied patients it was also acceptable to give him the benefit of the doubt about his version of the story.

Considering that two hours before the hearing was due to start, by his own admission Mr. Dhamecha was proved beyond any doubt to have been lying throughout the 18 month investigation by the GDC and has also been seen to have altered records concerning my husbands visits, I see absolutely no foundation for this decision to give him so much consideration.

Information regarding guidelines for dentists on the early detection of Oral Cancer is freely available to health professionals and the general public and statistics about the importance of early detection and diagnosis are well documented.
My husband�s chances of surviving his cancer were immediately reduced by 50% once his secondary tumour appeared in November of 2006, just 4 weeks after his last appointment with Mr.Dhamecha, and I find the assumption that the six month delay in diagnosis had no direct effect on his chance of survival to show a level of disregard for medical evidence that is beyond belief.

Robin�s primary tumour on his tongue was very small and could have been easily dealt with in June or July of 2006 giving him a good chance of a full recovery. The secondary tumour in his parotid gland, which developed over the following 5 months, was already 5cm by the time it was removed. This was the site of his recurrence just a few weeks after completion of his treatment, and ultimately the cause of the agonizing death he experienced.

Robin and I put our complete faith in the General Dental Council and it was as a result of their long and painstaking investigation that Mr. Dhamecha appeared before you. I would doubt if so much time and money would have been spent if they were not completely satisfied that Mr. Dhamecha had a serious case to answer and I am sure that they feel as strongly as I do that we were seriously let down by your decision.

I personally find it baffling that the committee appeared to attach greater weight to the character references they received on Mr. Dhamecha�s behalf, than to the substandard care my husband received, his poor record keeping and the fact that by his own admission he had lied in his evidence regarding the October appointments.
I am also very concerned that the committee accepted much of Mr.Dhamechas evidence as truthful in spite of the fact that he admitted he had lied.

In light of these issues I believe his fitness to practice continues to be impaired and I do not feel that the sanctions issued by the committee in 2008 reflect the seriousness of the matters raised and the shortcomings in Mr.Dhamecha�s conduct which were identified.
I do not accept that Mr.Dhamecha poses no risk and I note from the GDC decision when considering the issue of impairment and fitness to practice account must be taken of

�The need to protect the individual patient and the collective need to maintain confidence in the profession as well as declaring and upholding the proper standards of conduct and behavior which the public expect and the public interest includes amongst other things the protection of patients and maintenance of public confidence in the profession.

In my opinion Mr.Dhameca�s well documented conduct is likely to reduce public confidence in the profession and this will be further reduced by what I consider to be wholly inadequate sanctions. The fact that Mr.Dhamecha chose at the last minute to �fall on his sword� should have carried no weight in this decision. "


This is the statement of Mrs. Isabella Hamilton Read Dated July 31st 2009

Oh Liz, let's hope he doesn't get away with this. Congratulations on such a well written statement though. Surely they will take notice of this. I will be thinking of you and hoping for the best outcome for you.

Thanks sweetie. xx

As always Liz, you have the command of the English language and put thw words exacty in order,

U GO GIRL!!!

Liz

No way should a medical professional in the UK get away with killing a patient..
Some times our wheels grind slow, but we here always expect 100% from our practitioners, medical or Dental.

Don't let up lady
Sunshine.. love and hugs
Helen

Liz,

You have done a spectacular job of making your case. There's no question that this guy is a disgrace to my profession and his punishment is much less than he deserved. Even if you remove the malpractice from the equation, the fact that he modified his records, would have been enough for him to probably lose his liscense in the states.

I hope justice is done this time around.

Good luck.

Jerry

Good luck, Liz!
The guy is a disgrace to his profession.
Marlene

Good luck Liz, you are one badass gal, keep on it!

For anyone interested in what is happening in the case this link will take you too the GDC page then click on the dentists name.Reading it all 1 year on just gets my blood boiling all over again.The legal profession really do like to "blur" the edges with their complicated jargon don't they?


Nalin Dhamecha review of hearing