Surgeon who branded his initials on patients' livers told he can keep working

Status
Not open for further replies.
Northerner

Northerner

Admin (Retired)
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 1
A surgeon who branded his own initials on to unaware patients' new liver transplants has been told he can continue working within the field.

Simon Bramhall admitted to using an argon beam machine to label his initials on the organs of unconscious patients on the operating table in 2013, according to Birmingham Live.

Bramhall, who worked at Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Birmingham, was ordered by Birmingham Crown Court to complete 120 hours of unpaid work and was fined £10,000.

His registration was temporarily suspended in December 2020, however, a review on June 4 found him still fit to practice as a medical professional.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk

Surgeon who branded his initials on patients' livers told he can keep working

Simon Bramhall admitted to using an argon beam machine to label his initials on the organs of unconscious patients on the operating table in 2013.
www.dailyrecord.co.uk www.dailyrecord.co.uk
 
That is astounding!!! 😱
Both that he thought this was OK and then to be allowed to continue operating.
 
Personally I don't have a problem with it assuming it is merely cosmetic and not harmful. These people are very high functioning and there will be an element of artistic genius in their skill so I can understand him wanting to sign his work in some way. I would imagine quite a few of his colleagues were aware of what he was doing as the theatre will have a significant number of people assisting in such an operation. I guess someone blew the whistle on him.... unless it was picked up on a later scan.
There has to be an element of pride and vanity in it but if he was saving my life I wouldn't begrudge him signing off his masterpiece and I am assuming he would only initial it if he was happy with his work so I might even be happy to have his initials on my liver. Yes, ethically it is wrong, but when you are operating in life and death situations I imagine there is a fine line as to how you cope with the implications of that.
I would certainly hate for someone with his skill to be struck off and that investment in his training and skill wasted when it could be used saving other people's lives.
 
I’m struggling to respond without a swearing acronym. The degree of narcissism and arrogance involved is shocking. Why would that even occur to a surgeon to do during/after a complex operation? I find it utterly vile. It’s a gross abuse of trust.

The article says it was discovered when one patient had to be operated on again by a different surgeon, so the initials presumably weren’t visible any other way? That makes it even more creepy IMO.
 
Tbh if this had happened to me , personally I would have only been worried if it was detrimental to my liver but it does seem rather odd that he would do such a thing.
 
I find it surprising that people find it surprising that it happened.
Yes it is fundamentally "wrong" but these people are playing God to a large extent on a daily basis, trying to save peoples lives and I imagine the loss rate will be higher than most other surgery. They have to be hugely confident in their own abilities and judgement because they couldn't do it if they weren't. Arrogance will easily follow on from being overly confident. There will most likely be banter going on during the surgery just to lighten the tension and I could see how it could easily lead o from that. Why would it be any different that a top surgeon might want to "tag" his work than say a graffiti artist. When my Dad and I finished building my house I felt that same urge for us to leave something in the fabric of the building, identifying us. It is a human instinct I believe to want to "claim" something you are proud of having created or achieved.
I think his punishment of unpaid work and a fine was probably appropriate in view of the ethical breach but it certainly doesn't shock or offend me and I think it would be unthinkable to strike him off. This is not like a top athlete taking drugs. This man saves lives on a daily basis. To stop him doing that just punishes his patients.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ljc
Inka said:
I’m struggling to respond without a swearing acronym. The degree of narcissism and arrogance involved is shocking. Why would that even occur to a surgeon to do during/after a complex operation? I find it utterly vile. It’s a gross abuse of trust.

The article says it was discovered when one patient had to be operated on again by a different surgeon, so the initials presumably weren’t visible any other way? That makes it even more creepy IMO.
Click to expand...
Yup, pretty much what I thought too 😱 It's unnecessary, and surely when you are performing life-saving surgery nothing unnecessary should be happening! 😱 :( You can be proud of your work in knowing the person is alive and well, not the knowledge that you have secretly graffitied them :(
 
I see what you’re saying @rebrascora but in the case of your house you’re marking a) an inanimate object not a person, and b) something that is yours. I don’t think they’re comparable. The surgeon will already have got his ‘mark’ on the patient’s medical records as his name will be recorded there, and, if a good surgeon, his work will speak for itself and his reputation will be built on that. Now he’s damaged his reputation for what?

I can think of other ‘marks’ that I would say it’s closer to. I don’t know if he gave an explanation or any clue to why he did it, so we probably won’t know.
 
His 'cards' if not his liver have been marked I suspect. One more strike and he'll be out I should imagine.
If we find out he's done it again, or does something similar, then he should be shown the door.
 
Most graffiti artists including Banksy do not own the properties they "embellish"

I should say that I totally agree what he did was wrong, but I can just imagine how that sort of mentality happens in that line of work and i don't personally find it offensive nor would I be overly upset if he had done it to me.... provided the work he did was good and saved my life and it was not detrimental to the function of the liver.
 
Inka said:
I’m struggling to respond without a swearing acronym. The degree of narcissism and arrogance involved is shocking. Why would that even occur to a surgeon to do during/after a complex operation? I find it utterly vile. It’s a gross abuse of trust.

The article says it was discovered when one patient had to be operated on again by a different surgeon, so the initials presumably weren’t visible any other way? That makes it even more creepy IMO.
Click to expand...
I guess at least the new surgeon knew it was his work!

The fundamental point is - the guy has messed up, yes badly, but he has been through due process of his peers and will be monitored closely in the future. The NHS is desperately short of world class surgeons which he sounds like he is. If he goes on to save 10,000 people over the remainder of his career without incident, I think I can forgive one massive mistake, especially if one of those lives he saves is mine and the risk of what he did to the patient was negligible.

But I guess the overarching concern is - are the patients he embellished ok with it - if they forgive him, that's all that matters. If they don't, then he should probably not practice anymore out of respect to them.
 
Last edited:
BlueArmy said:
I guess at least the new surgeons knew it was his work!

I guess the fundamental point is - the guy has messed up, yes badly, but in has been through due process of his peers and will be monitored closely in the future. The NHS is desperately short of world class surgeons which he sounds like he is. If he goes on to save 10,000 people over the remainder of his career without incident, I think I can forgive one massive mistake, especially if one of those lives he saves is mine.
Click to expand...
And what if his unnecessary scarring had caused an infection which killed a close family member of yours?
 
then he would be in prison serving life for murder and i'd have a different opinion on it. The same if it wasn't one of my family members, but I am assuming he knew the action he took would result in no risk of infection. I would imagine burning tissue prevents infection to be honest.

It was a stupid mistake, I am not defending his actions. Merely making the point that he has a opportunity to make good his wrong several times over with a skill that is rare in the NHS and take a long time to obtain, if ever.
 
Last edited:
@BlueArmy I would hope world class surgeons don’t stamp their mark on unconscious and non-consenting patients. It’s a gross breach of trust. It wasn’t just a one-off mistake, he did it twice. It’s the fact he either didn’t think there was anything wrong with it, or, knew it was wrong but got a kick out of doing it anyway, that disturbs me.
 
I'm not defending his actions, I agree it was disturbing. I am however, defending the position of the medical regulator to allow him to continue practicing.
 
Highly intelligent man, why would he behave that way, makes no sense.

What he has done is disgraceful really, no patient consent & initials served no purpose medically, just his own gratification. All said pleased he's not struck off & unpaid work will give him time to reflect on his behaviour, sadly clever guy who lacks common sense.
 
rebrascora said:
Most graffiti artists including Banksy do not own the properties they "embellish"

I should say that I totally agree what he did was wrong, but I can just imagine how that sort of mentality happens in that line of work and i don't personally find it offensive nor would I be overly upset if he had done it to me.... provided the work he did was good and saved my life and it was not detrimental to the function of the liver.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I missed your reply above. Banksy is treated as a special case, but graffiti in general is an eyesore and a crime:

“In England and Wales, graffiti is considered an act of criminal damage under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 and offenders can be punished with an unlimited fine.
In Scotland, graffiti is treated as an act of vandalism, and prosecuted under the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995. The maximum fine is £10,000. A prison sentence of up to 3 months is also possible for a first offence, and of up to 6 months for any further offence.”

I simply don’t understand his motivation - why would anyone want to ‘mark’ another human being with their initials? It wouldn’t occur to me in a million years. It’s gross and reminiscent of abhorrent practices.

The fact he was blinded by his own arrogance is shocking. The idea that he thought it was ok is very hard to believe. In my opinion, the most likely thing is that he got a kick out of doing it and thought no-one would ever find out. I wouldn’t want someone with that psychology operating on me personally.
 
Once you start to see your patients, or indeed any person, as a blank canvas to use as you feel fit, it's probably not the sort of sociopath I would like to have cutting into my body.
Those that justify that possibly need to consider exactly were they would draw the line if they were being used as artwork.
Hannibal Lector always made a splash.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top