Mother who lost son to meningitis wins SEVEN year battle to bring consultant who refused to prescribe antibiotics before GMC
A mother of a boy who died from meningitis has won a seven year battle to bring a consultant before the General Medical Council.
William Cressey died after being sent home by a consultant paediatrician responsible for his care.
It is alleged the doctor failed to prescribe antibiotics to the 10 year-old from Croft, County Durham.
William Cressey was taken to Darlington Memorial Hospital by his mother but was turned away twice
William was brought to Darlington Memorial Hospital by his mother, Cheryl, with suspected meningitis.
He was discharged after doctors initially diagnosed a migraine.
William was taken back to the hospital the next day, but was again refused treatment for meninigits.
ACCUSATIONS TO BE HEARD AT GMC
It is alleged that Dr Malik Alam…
* Failed to properly examine and assess William
* Failed to devise or record an adequate care plan and caused William to be discharged
* Failed to respond promptly to requests for assistance from junior colleagues
* Failed to carry out a timely review or examination of William
* Failed to ensure the prompt transfer of William to a paediatric intensive care unit
When he was eventually given antibiotics, it was too late. He died on March 1, 2005, after being transferred to Newcastle General Hospital.
At an inquest in 2009, Coroner David Mitford recorded a verdict of death by natural causes.
However, he said the failure to prescribe medication may have contributed to William’s death.
Dr Malik Mahmood Alam, who made the decision not to prescribe antibiotics, will face a GMC hearing later this month.
Mrs Cressey said she was pleased the hearing would take place.
She said: 'This is all about William. Seven years ago today, he was dying and I was fighting for him to get treatment.'
A spokeswoman for the County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust said: 'This relates to a tragic case in 2005, at which time Dr Alam was employed by the trust.
'The trust has co-operated fully with all proceedings; however, it would not be appropriate to comment further before the hearing.'