(reference: Lucy Letby…why investigation is always needed – Fiveballs Resources & Blog)
The case of Lucy Letby is a heart-wrenching illustration of the dire consequences of disbelief and subjective assumptions. At first, medical personnel were sceptical about Letby being accountable for the demise of several babies under her care. Many found it hard to believe that a nurse could cause harm to innocent infants, and as a result, Letby’s suspicion did not receive the prompt attention it deserved.
Lucy Letby is a British Serial killer and former neonatal nurse at Countess of Chester Hospital, Chester, who attacked at least thirteen infants in her care, killing seven. Working at the hospital since 2011, her crimes occurred between June 2015 and June 2016; Lucy was finally arrested in June 2018. Letby’s methods included injecting her victims with air or insulin, overfeeding them and physically assaulting them.
“It can’t be Lucy. Not nice, Lucy”
Reports indicate that Dr Stephen Brearey was troubled by the deaths of three infants within a 14-day period. Upon investigating the care provided to the babies and the staffing during each death, Dr Brearey discovered that Lucy Letby was the only staff member present on all three occasions. At the time of the incidents, Letby was 25 years old, respected by her colleagues, and considered an important team member due to her qualifications to care for the most unwell babies in intensive care. She often volunteered to work extra shifts.
Dr Brearey shared his findings with Alison Kelly, the nursing director, and pointed out that although the cause of the deaths was unclear, there was a common factor. However, he expressed disbelief that Lucy, whom he described as “nice,” could be responsible. The paper reported that the senior management took the nurse’s side over the doctors. Dr Stephen Brearey and Ravi Jayaram, the two paediatricians who raised the alarm to the senior leadership team, were reportedly warned that involving the police would harm the trust’s reputation.
The dangers of subjective assumptions
Although it is often challenging to identify toxic employees, senior leaders must do more to ensure objectivity and hold people accountable. It is worth noting that some of the worst perpetrators in the workplace can hide their true selves behind an innocent appearance, cleverly disguising their toxicity under a veneer of professional astuteness. Therefore, clear evidence is often required to support conversations.
The reluctance to consider Letby as a potential suspect illustrates the dangers of subjective beliefs and assumptions in critical situations like this. It is critical to approach all cases with an open mind and be willing to consider all possibilities, no matter how unlikely they may seem. By taking an unbiased approach, we can ensure justice is served and prevent future tragedies.
The importance and benefits of external investigations
Each person is a unique combination of genetic traits and environmental factors. Our past experiences shape our perspectives, biases, and preconceptions, affecting our interpretation of reality. However, our knowledge is limited, and we frequently rely on assumptions and emotions to fill in the gaps. Unfortunately, subjective beliefs can hinder our understanding, leading to negative outcomes if we do not consider an unbiased perspective.
Organisations may choose to follow their internal processes, but external investigators bring the advantages of objectivity and timeliness. Internal investigations may face delays and potential biases.
If an external investigation had been launched from the start, the hospital’s workplace culture would not have been hindered, and employees would not have felt compelled to remain silent to maintain appearances. Colleagues generally have a narrow view of their co-workers since they mostly interact with them professionally. Furthermore, people are no longer restricted to a single job or industry for their entire lives, and their identity extends beyond their job title. Their true selves outside of work can be quite different, and their appearances within work can be deceiving.
Steps to take during allegations or suspicion of malpractice
Whenever there’s suspicion of malpractice or where allegations have been made, it is paramount to:
- Conduct a robust investigation as soon as possible.
- Carefully examine all the facts and evidence (invite neutral/external investigators where possible).
- Avoid being manipulated, blindsided or making assumptions.
- Focus on ensuring justice and getting to the bottom of the issue.
- Avoid groupthink – evaluate all ideas critically.
- Remember that individuals are innocent until proven guilty.
Despite doing the above, it is still possible for a perpetrator to go scot-free, especially if they know how to manipulate others and play the system; however, regardless of the circumstances, one can show that one has done everything possible to establish the truth.
