Thursday, December 31, 2015

Motherisk: (Aftermath 10): Justice Susan Lang's report on the Motherisk Hair Analysis Independent review. "The Goudge Report is relevant to this Independent Review for at least three reasons: 1: It highlighted the dangers with having a laboratory within the institution that routinely provided a forensic service yet was led by individuals who lacked any forensic training. 2: It concluded that the Hospital's lines of oversight and accountability over the forensic pathology service lacked clarity and created a vacuum where nobody was held accountable in the forensic pathology service; 3: Commissioner Goudge noted the role that SickKids reputation for excellence played in positioning Dr Smith as a leading expert in his field, not withstanding his lack of forensic expertise. All three of these lessons should have been applied to MDTL, but the Hospital did not do so." Lang report. Page 14; (Must, Must Read. HL);


The Honourable Susan Lang, the Independent Reviewer of the Motherisk Hair Analysis Review, completed her review and sent her findings and recommendations to the Attorney General of Ontario on December 15, 2015. You will find the Report of the Independent Review in both .PDF and .EPUB format on this page. 

"My conclusion that SickKids failed to exercise meaningful oversight over MDTL's (Motherisk Drug Testing Laboratory)  work must be considered in the context of the Hospital's experience with Dr. Charles Smith, a pediatric pathologist who worked at SickKids. Dr. Smith was the firs director of the Ontario Pediatric Forensic Pathology Unit (OPFPU), which was housed in the Hospital. In April 2007,  the Government of Ontario appointed the Honourable Justice  Stephen T. Goudge  as commissioner of the  Inquiry into Pediatric Forensic Pathology in Ontario. The Hospital was a party with standing at the inquiry. Commissioner Goudge released his report on October 1, 2008, (Goudge Report) - the same year in which the Hospital determined  that clinical accreditation might not be achieved for MDTL. The Goudge Report is relevant to this Independent Review for at least three reasons: 1: It highlighted the dangers with having a laboratory within the institution that routinely provided a forensic service yet was led by individuals who lacked any forensic training. 2: It concluded that the Hospital's lines of oversight  and accountability over the forensic pathology service lacked clarity and created a vacuum where nobody was held accountable in the forensic pathology service; 3: Commissioner Goudge noted the role that SickKids reputation for excellence played in positioning Dr Smith as a leading expert in his field, not withstanding his lack of forensic expertise. All three of these lessons should have been applied to MDTL, but the Hospital did not do so." Lang report. Page 14;

The Lang  report ca be found in the above formats at:

http://www.m-hair.ca/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
 
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
 
The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:
 
 http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
 
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html

Harold Levy: Publisher;  The Charles Smith Blog.