The Gosport War Memorial Hospital 1990s opioid deaths scandal. Dr Jane Barton, 77, has been a case study in female unaccountability for 35+ years.

Dr. Harold Shipman is a well-known name to many followers of this blog. The start of his Wikipedia page:

“Harold Frederick Shipman (14 January 1946 – 13 January 2004), known to acquaintances as Fred Shipman, was an English doctor in general practice and serial killer. He is considered to be one of the most prolific serial killers in modern history, with an estimated 250 victims over roughly 30 years. On 31 January 2000, Shipman was convicted of murdering 15 patients under his care. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life order. On 13 January 2004, one day before his 58th birthday, Shipman hanged himself in his cell at HM Prison Wakefield, West Yorkshire.”

It would be fair to say that Dr Harold Shipman is a name well-known to British people in particular. Not so, that of Dr Jane Barton. She does not, seemingly, merit her own Wikipedia page.

I turn to the Gosport War Memorial Hospital 1990s opioid deaths scandal (Wikipedia link). The start of the page:

“The Gosport War Memorial Hospital 1990s opioid deaths scandal arose from the premature shortening of life of over 400 patients at Gosport War Memorial Hospital, Hampshire, England by use of opioid drugs and apparent failures by relevant authorities to detect the issue in a timely manner and for subsequent inadequate investigations into the issues.”

Later on the page:

“On 20 June 2018, after an enquiry, which took four years and cost £14 million, the Gosport Independent Panel published a report which found that 456 deaths in the 1990s had ‘followed inappropriate administration of  opioid drugs’. In his introduction, Bishop James Jones says:

“The shocking outcome of the Panel’s work is that we have now been able to conclude that the lives of over 450 patients were shortened while in the hospital … during a certain period at Gosport War Memorial Hospital, there was a disregard for human life and a culture of shortening the lives of a large number of patients by prescribing and administering ‘dangerous doses’ of a hazardous combination of medication not clinically indicated or justified … when relatives complained about the safety of patients and the appropriateness of their care, they were consistently let down by those in authority – both individuals and institutions…

If the similar cases with missing records are taken into account, the true number of victims may be up to 650. Other figures show that 70% of the victims were not admitted for terminal care, [J4MB emphasis] so their deaths were unexpected, with most living only two days or less after being administered the drug. Nurses’ concerns were repeatedly ignored.

The panel found that the hospital management, local healthcare organisations, Hampshire Constabulary, the Crown Prosecution Service, the General Medical Council, the Nursing and Midwifery Council, and local politicians had all failed to act to protect patients and their families. According to Prof Sir Brian Jarman, an expert on hospital mortality at the Dr Foster Unit at Imperial College London, the Gosport accident may be repeated because of NHS continued blame culture in pressuring or even firing whistleblowers.”

No mention is made in the Wikipedia page of Dr Jane Barton. I turn to a BBC piece from October 2024, Police identify 24 suspects over hospital drug deaths. The start of the piece:

“Detectives investigating hundreds of deaths at a hospital have identified 24 suspects.

An independent panel previously found 456 patients died after being given opiates inappropriately [J4MB: this links to a BBC piece which opens momentarily, then vanishes] at Gosport War Memorial Hospital between 1987 and 2001.

Families of those who died have been informed a new criminal investigation, led by Kent Police, has begun sharing files with the Crown Prosecution Service for charging consideration.

Operation Magenta, which follows three previous investigations by Hampshire Constabulary that resulted in no prosecutions, said 21 people were being investigated for alleged gross negligence manslaughter and three for alleged health and safety offences.”

Let us remind ourselves that 24 years have elapsed since the end of the period in which patients died after being given opioid drugs inappropriately. From the same BBC piece:

“A 2018 report into the deaths found there was a ‘disregard for human life’ of a large number of patients from 1989 to 2000.

There was an “institutionalised regime” of prescribing and administering ‘dangerous’ amounts of a medication not clinically justified at the Hampshire hospital, the report added.

Dr Jane Barton oversaw the practice of prescribing on the wards and is the only person to face disciplinary action.

She was found guilty of failings in her care of 12 patients between 1996 and 1999.

But she was not struck off the medical register, choosing to retire after the findings were published.

In a statement in 2018, Dr Barton said she was a “hard-working doctor” who was “doing her best” for patients in a “very inadequately resourced” part of the NHS.” [J4MB emphasis.]

Onto a 2018 BBC piece, Gosport hospital deaths: Who is Dr Jane Barton? Extracts:

“Doctors are meant to preserve life and cause no harm. The Hippocratic Oath, written 2,500 years ago, includes the line: ‘I will use treatments for the benefit of the ill in accordance with my ability and my judgment, but from what is to their harm and injustice I will keep them.’ A review published on Wednesday found more than 450 patients died sooner than they would have after being given powerful painkillers inappropriately at Gosport War Memorial Hospital.

Who is the doctor who actively shortened her patients’ lives?

Dr Jane Ann Barton, now aged 70, graduated from Oxford University in 1972 as a Bachelor of Medicine…

While at the hospital she was responsible for the care of people inhabiting 44 beds.

During her 12 years at the hospital, Dr Barton signed 854 death certificates. Of the patients she treated, 94% had received opiates, with ‘little evidence of the three analgesia steps recommended in palliative care: non-opiate, then weak opiate, then strong opiate’, an earlier review in 2003 found…

In some cases the aim of transfer to Gosport was for long-term care, as in patients with terminal cancer.

Others, however, were there for rehabilitation following a stroke or fractured hip.

When people die from a fracture, the cause of death should be recorded as “accidental” and accidental death is reported to a coroner.

Dr Barton, however, recorded fracture-related deaths as stemming from bronchopneumonia, meaning the coroner was not informed. Any unusually high post-fracture death rate would therefore have passed unnoticed. [J4MB emphasis. Now, why might Dr Barton have done that?]

Dr Barton stopped working at the hospital in 2000 but continued to practise as a GP…

In one set of notes Dr Barton wrote: ‘[The patient] is frightened, agitated appears in pain. Suggest transdermal analgesia despite no obvious clinical justification!! Dr Lord to countersign. I am happy for nursing staff to confirm death…’ [J4MB emphasis]

A 2010 General Medical Council investigation found Dr Barton guilty of serious professional misconduct, and of putting her patients at risk of an early death – but the panel did not remove her right to practice medicine, saying it had ‘taken into account her 10 years of safe practice as a GP‘ [J4MB: A reminder that Dr Barton graduated in 1972, 38 years before.] and 200 letters of support.

Instead, 11 conditions were placed upon Dr Barton, including a three-year ban on injecting opiates.”

Onto another BBC piece, from 2019, Gosport hospital deaths: Evidence ‘strong enough to bring charges’. Extracts:

“During the investigations, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) looked at possible charges of manslaughter and murder in relation to Dr Barton and some nurses [J4MB emphasis] who administered the drugs.

However, prosecutors decided there was not a reasonable chance of securing convictions. [J4MB emphasis. This is absolute nonsense. This simply reflects the unwillingness of the CPS to hold women – in general, and Dr Jane Barton in particular, here – accountable.]

One auxiliary nurse said: ‘It got to the stage that every time Dr Barton came to the annexe, I would think to myself who’s going to die now?’

In another statement, a staff nurse said: ‘It seemed that most patients were going on drivers even when they were not in pain.’

Another nurse said they believed the drug was used ‘to keep the waiting lists down’.”

[End of extracts.]

Long story short? Up to 650 patients – 70% of whom were not admitted for terminal care – died as a result of inappropriate use of opioid drugs at one hospital over the course of 1987-2001. All (or almost all) of the 24 people suspected of being responsible for the deaths are women. I say ‘almost all’ because maybe some of the nurses are men. Collectively they shortened the lives of far more people than Harold Shipman (estimated 250 people).

If those suspected of being responsible had been men, the investigations and trials would surely have concluded many years ago. There would also have been a huge amount of mainstream media coverage until the conclusion of the matter, as opposed to the minimal coverage of the Gosport hospital story. The latest mainstream media piece I have found is on ITVX, Gosport War Memorial Hospital: Families’ frustration in latest meeting as they search for answers.

Dr Jane Barton is now 77. Will she ever be prosecuted in relation to the 650 deaths in the 1990s – when she was in her 40s – and if found guilty, incarcerated for the rest of her days? No, of course she won’t. The authorities are biding their time until she dies, never having been held to account.

Dr Jane Barton has been a case study in female unaccountability for 35+ years.

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Professor Alex Edmans: “No, boardroom diversity does not mean higher profits.”

A cornerstone of initiatives aimed at persuading companies to appoint more women to their boards is the claim that by doing so, companies can expect their financial performance to improve. This laughable assertion of a business case for more women on boards conflates correlation with causation. But correlation does not imply causation.

In 2012 Mike Buchanan – on behalf of our associated website Campaign for Merit in Business – presented evidence (from numerous longitudinal studies) of a causal link between increasing gender diversity on corporate boards and financial DECLINE to House of Commons and House of Lords inquiries. The video of his oral submission to the House of Commons inquiry is here (56:50). 

We recently posted a piece with the snappy title The Diversity Project (chair: Helena Morrissey) commissions a study (leader: Professor Alex Edmans) to assess the investment impact of diversity of thought and have since researched the online output of Professor Edmans, an economist who is professor of finance at London Business School and Mercers’ School Memorial Emeritus Professor of Business at Gresham College. If you take nothing else from this blog piece, you should catch a fascinating podcast interview, Is DEI built on dodgy data? (October 2024, 58 minutes).

The biography on his website is here (is it just me, or are professors looking very young these days, like policemen?). The Policy and Practice page is here, with links to some of his articles including Is There Really A Business Case For Diversity? (Medium, 2021) and No, boardroom diversity does not mean higher profits (Telegraph, 2021) and Is diversity actually good for business? (Spectator, 2024).

Edmans is the author of May Contain Lies: How Stories, Statistics and Studies Exploit Our Biases – And What We Can Do About It. The hardback edition (£14.99) and Kindle edition (£9.99) were published last April, the paperback edition (£10.99) will be published next April.

There are plenty of video and audio files on YouTube of the good professor, here. They include Do Diverse Companies Really Perform Better? (Sacred Cows, 2024) and May Contain Lies (Stanford Graduate School of Business, 2024).

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Julie Bindel ‘worked alongside’ Keir Starmer when he was Director of Public Prosecutions, head of the Crown Prosecution Service

Yesterday (14 June, 2024) we posted a piece about some of the content of the Labour party’s election manifesto, which includes a plan to ‘fast-track’ rape cases through ‘specialist’ rape courts which will inevitably condemn even more innocent men to lengthy jail terms than at present. The stated intention is to increase the number of convictions. We expect Keir Starmer to seek to introduce juryless rape courts to deliver this, with feminist-compliant judges. Not long ago the Scottish judiciary refused the Scottish government’s demand that such courts were introduced.

Starmer was the Director of Public Prosecutions (head of the Crown Prosecution Service) over 2008-13. In an article for the Daily Mail in 2022, Julie Bindel wrote that she had ‘worked alongside’ Keir Starmer when he was the DPP. Our blog piece on the matter is here.

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

Our YouTube channel is here, our Facebook channel here, our Twitter channel here.

If everyone who reads this gives us £5.00 – or even better, £5.00 or more, monthly – we could change the world. You can support our work by making a donation here.

The Rise of Cry Bullies | DarkHorse 311

Our thanks to Rod for this (video, 15:37). From the video description:

“Bret Weinstein reacts to a study presented by Heather Heying in Episode 311 of The Evolutionary Lens, which suggests that, unlike men, women tend to show empathy regardless of whether it is justified.

“Everybody is competing for the claim of most victimized because that brings about the most power.”

Watch the full episode: https://youtube.com/live/7GWPEFIF5lc (video, 1:58:24).”

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

A new law will allow women to abort babies for ANY reason – including their sex – right up to full term. Baroness Monckton, who has vowed to fight it all the way, reveals the barbaric truth…

Our thanks to Jeff for this. An extract:

“The Crime and Policing Bill now being debated in the House of Lords is a lengthy and important piece of legislation, which has been detaining peers, in our capacity as a revising chamber, for the past two and half months.

Most of the country, however, will be unaware that a clause, unrelated to this bill, had been sneaked in via an amendment in the name of the Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, after just 46 minutes of backbench debate in the House of Commons.

This is Clause 191, entitled ‘Removal of Women from the criminal law related to abortion’. It removes all remaining legal invigilation of women regarding abortion, allowing a mother-to-be to abort her baby, up to full term, for any reason at all, including its sex. [J4MB emphasis.]

This clause passed the Commons without any evidence, scrutiny or public consultation. It is a reckless and radical proposal, with implications both for the mental and physical health of the mother, and disastrous consequences for the child.”

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Mother of eight Carla Hunt, 38, claimed nearly £15,000 of benefits for children she no longer cared for after it ‘slipped her mind’ to tell the authorities. Suspended sentence because… the usual.

Our thanks to Jeff for this. Extracts:

“In all, she collected a total of £14,742.56 in benefits she did not qualify for – and sought to blame social workers.

Hunt broke down in tears as she was sentenced to 12 weeks suspended for 12 months at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court on Friday (January 30). She had been tried and convicted in her absence…

Peter Ricketts, defending, stated she was a victim of long-term domestic violence [J4MB: alleged victim, we assume – she lost custody of her children, presumably to her partner.] as well as had a number of mental health and learning difficulties which impacted her ability to understand paperwork and procedures… [J4MB translation: She’s a woman, what can you do?]

He [J4MB: Her solicitor] further submitted that Hunt did not deliberately lie to the DWP [J4MB: No, she just didn’t tell them the truth, a totally different matter!] and confirmed she had never previously committed a crime.

Hunt was ordered to carry out 20 days of rehabilitation activity and pay a £154 victim surcharge.

The Chair of the Bench said: ‘We have thought long and hard about this today. We are not going to lecture you, you know what you did was wrong.

‘We are going to suspend the prison sentence. Keep your nose clean, keep out of trouble and you won’t go to prison.’ “

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

The Big Questions (BBC): “Is the system still stacked against women? Does prison work?” Video #192 of 800+ videos on the J4MB YouTube channel.

Today’s video is here (40:56).

Over a period of more than two years we’re posting links to one video daily from the J4MB YouTube channel. The channel includes our media appearances since 2012, 300+ videos of talks and other materials from the International Conferences on Men’s Issues (2014 – ) and other men’s issues conferences we’ve been involved with, and so much more. The individual conference playlists are here.

Our website Campaign for Merit in Business was created in the light of the considerable evidence of a causal link between increasing gender diversity on boards and corporate financial decline. Mike Buchanan, Steve Moxon and Dr Catherine Hakim (the originator of Preference Theory) presented evidence to House of Commons and House of Lords inquiries in 2012, the video of their House of Commons evidence session is here (56:50).

Finally, we run the award-winning website Laughing at Feminists. The related comedy channel (170+ videos) is here. Remember, it’s more than important to laugh at feminists, it’s a civic duty.  

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Paul Elam interviews Dr Helen Smith following the publication today of her new book, “His Side: Men Speak Out on Dating, Marriage, and Life in America”.

Enjoy (video, 51:19).

The American psychologist Helen Smith was the author of Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream – and Why It Matters (2015). Today her new book His Side: Men Speak Out on Dating, Marriage, and Life in America was published.

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.

Waterford woman Ellen Moloney (34) pleads guilty to making a false accusation against her partner.

Interesting. An extract:

“Sergeant John Phelan told the court that on April 25, 2025, Ms Moloney attended the garda station and made a detailed complaint against her partner, claiming that he physically and sexually assaulted her.

The defendant told gardaí that she thought she would die.

Acting for the defendant, solicitor Hilary Delahunty said his client lives a “chaotic lifestyle” and that the allegation was “not plucked out of thin air” or “creative nonsense”.

He said that the injured party was sitting with the defendant and wished the matter to be withdrawn.”

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.