Doctor-murderers are rare, but there is a lesson to learn
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The scale of Harold Shipman's crimes is so great that it enters the zone of myth. The obscurity of his motive only adds to the power of the story. Paradoxically, the very uniqueness of his case provides some assurance that something similar will never happen again.
In any case, many simple reforms to the procedures for recording deaths and carrying out post-mortem examinations have already been made. The single-handed doctor's practice will become a thing of the past. Above all, the awareness of the possibility of such killings is an inoculation against another such unusual individual going undetected for anything like so long.
It might be thought, therefore, that the implications of the Shipman case, awful as they are for the 260 families concerned, are limited for the rest of us. So they are, and we should be grateful for that.
However, there is a wider lesson, which is that it is absolutely right to be sceptical of professionals. If more of Dr Shipman's victims or their families had asked more challenging questions about his diagnoses and treatments, he might have been stopped earlier.
This is a principle which extends well beyond medicine. Parents ought to question what their children's teachers are doing; no one should simply accept what their lawyer, accountant or council official tells them.
Attitudes among professionals themselves have changed in recent decades, but there is still a long way to go. Too many doctors, for example, resent patients who look up drugs and treatments on the internet.
In some ways, the erosion of deference is a bad thing, but it does not have to mean rudeness and incivility. The rise of proper scepticism, the growth of confidence and the increasing willingness to take responsibility for decisions about our lives – these are all good things and ought to transform the relationship between professionals and their clients.
After the horror of this case, no one should feel embarrassed to ask for information or for a second opinion. And no professional should take offence when consumers assert their rights.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments