Responses

PDF

The implications of the David Glass case for future clinical practice in the UK
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: The implications of the David Glass case for future clinical practice in the UK

    Dear Editor,

    Hindsight is both a wonderful and a dreadful thing. Although outside the scope of Elias-Jones and Samanta's article, was David's tonsillectomy necessary in the first place [for "noisy and laboured breathing"]? Have those who made the referral and who agreed to carry out the operation reviewed whether it was the right thing to do? Were the referral and operation done because of pressure from, for exampl...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.