healthmedicinet

He said: “The committee has been doing a lot of work following the Francis
inquiry [into appalling care at Mid Staffordshire foundation trust] about
how to foster a more open culture, and how to make sure concerns can be
raised and acted upon.

“I was very concerned to hear about this case because on the face of it, it
raises very serious questions about what happens when attempts are made to
examine safety risks”.

Prof Kapur, 63, who now works as visiting professor of neuropsychology at
University College London, has now called for greater protection for people
in his position.

“I raised my concerns about staff shortages and the impact on patient care
several times to my line managers,” he said.

“I had a duty to do so on behalf of my patients, but I was repeatedly ignored
by the hospital senior management.

“They refused to pay any attention to me. If that can happen to a professor
like myself, with a worldwide reputation in his field, imagine what happens
when more junior members of staff try to raise the alarm.”

Cambridge University Hospitals NHS trust (CUH) dismissed Prof Kapur in 2010,
claiming there had been a breakdown in their relationship because of his
management style and working methods.

It also suggested he had been involved in fraud involving hospital funds.

But last July an employment tribunal ruled that he had been unfairly dismissed.

The tribunal found the trust “did not conduct itself as a reasonable employer
in this regard” and it condemned its attempt to accuse Prof Kapur of fraud.

In its judgment, the panel stated: “There is no question whatsoever of Dr
Kapur doing anything other than manipulating a financial system in order to
ensure that his patients’ best interests were fulfilled in circumstances
where he was dissatisfied with the resources at his disposal.”

It added: “The tribunal condemns unreservedly the way in which the NHS has
conducted itself in respect of this allegation. It proved unwilling to
accept without some probing by the tribunal that the position was now closed
and Dr Kapur was not found to be involved in activity that could be
categorised as fraudulent.”

However, the tribunal found that Prof Kapur had not been sacked because of his
whistle-blowing, but because there had been “an irredeemable breakdown in
trust, confidence and communication” between him and other managers.

For that reason, the tribunal did not order the trust to reinstate him.

Prof Kapur claims that standards of care and patient safety at Addenbrooke’s
appear not to have improved.

Sources have told him that in January, a section of a surgeon’s glove was left
inside a patient after an operation. It is thought to have led to a
potentially serious infection.

The professor claims that the hospital failed to report the incident to the
regulatory authorities, as it is required to do. He has now reported it to
the Care Quality Commission and Monitor, the health care regulator.

Furthermore, he claims there were eight similar cases — classed as “never
events” — in 2011-12 alone.

Talking exclusively to The Telegraph, Prof Kapur said he was determined
to continue speaking out on behalf of NHS whistleblowers.

He said: “Many whistle-blowers are forced to give up because it becomes so
hard to continue. Some have nervous breakdowns or they can’t afford
financially to carry on.

Some even kill themselves — and I’ve come close to that at times — because
they appear to have no support against an aggressive employer.

“But I’m fortunate. I have the determination, the knowledge and the resources
to be able to carry on. What’s more, I’ve got a moral imperative to stand up
on behalf of other whistleblowers.”

Faced with raising £300,000 of tribunal costs, Prof Kapur had to sell his
family’s home in Southampton. He has also had to cash in his pension.

He is bitter that his attempts to bring problems at Addenbrooke’s to light
have been met with indifference — if not outright hostility — by some senior
NHS managers.

In his letter, Sir David said that his hands were tied, as Addenbrooke’s and
CUH were separate bodies from the Department of Health, and so responsible
for their own employment arrangements.

“But unless people like me stand up and fight this injustice and unfairness
things will never change,” he said.

A CUH spokesman said: “We completely disagree with Narinder Kapur’s assertions
that the neuropsychology service is not providing a high-quality and safe
service to our patients.

“Patient safety is at the heart of everything we do, and we are fully
committed to and strongly encourage a culture of open reporting about any
aspect of patient care.

“Although the tribunal found that the trust had not followed exactly the right
procedure to dismiss Dr Kapur, it concluded that he would have been properly
dismissed shortly afterwards and that 75 per cent of the responsibility for
his dismissal lay with him.”

Addenbrooke’s said it had not experienced any “never events” since August last
year and that it won the Dr Foster award for lower-than-expected mortality
rates last year.

The trust said that because the fragment of glove found in the patient was so
small, the incident was not preventable and did not qualify as a “never
event”.