The recent conviction of Lucy Letby, the neonatal nurse who murdered seven infants and attempted to murder six others while working at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015-2016, has raised fundamental questions about how something like this could have happened – and why it took so long to stop her.
The fact is attempts were made to stop her. Two medical consultants, Dr Stephen Brearey and Dr Ravi Jayaram, both raised concerns about unexplained infant deaths as early as July 2015. By October 2015, both brought specific concerns about Letby, who had been on duty during each of the deaths, to the senior director of nursing.
But both have related how they were rebuffed by hospital management at each stage of the process. Dr Jayaram even revealed he was told by management “not to make a fuss”. It wasn’t until June 2016, after repeated complaints, that Letby was finally removed from her clinical duties.
Common sense would dictate that if a senior doctor raised concerns with managers, even informally, it would be taken seriously. This apparently wasn’t the case – nor is it the first time an NHS doctor’s concerns have been ignored by senior management. This highlights an urgent need to change the structure of the NHS to ensure managers and executives are held to account for the decisions they make.
Refusal to act
The NHS is an inherently hierarchical organisation, with many layers of management.
Clinical managers are typically clinicians (such as nurses) with managerial responsibilities. These middle managers oversee operations in their own clinical areas.
There are also senior managers, who often have no clinical experience. These managers have little or no contact with ward staff. They manage the hospital at the executive level, looking at finances, human resources and the hospital’s reputation.
In hospitals such as the Countess of Chester, most routine decisions are made by middle management. If there’s problems with staff on the ward, it’s normally up to the unit manager to decide whether or not these concerns are escalated to senior management.
The unit manager in this case presumably would have known Letby personally – and given that the evidence against Letby was largely circumstantial, it would have been very difficult to suspend or even investigate Letby at first.
Even once the unit manager and senior clinicians brought their concerns again to the attention of more senior management, evidence shared as part of the trial shows hospital executives pushed back – refusing to meet with them, shutting down suggestions that police needed to be involved and even ordering them to write an apology to Letby for raising concerns about her.
Brearey and Jayaram suggested that executives were attempting to minimise any reputational damage to the unit and, by extension, the hospital. The decisions of hospital executives will be investigated as part of a public inquiry.
Freedom to Speak Up
There’s a long history in the NHS of lone whistleblowers being pilloried for trying to raise concerns about failings in patient care. This is what led to the Freedom to Speak Up review, which investigated how organisations dealt with concerns raised by NHS staff. Ironically, the report was published in 2015.
The review found NHS employees were often afraid of raising concerns out of fear of victimisation or the worry they wouldn’t be listened to. Many also faced isolation and bullying when they did speak up.
The results of the report led to the Freedom to Speak Up policy, which provides guidance for NHS staff on how they can raise patient safety concerns. A Freedom to Speak Up Guardian is also now present in every NHS Trust to ensure issues raised are responded to.
At the time Brearey and Jayaram raised their concerns about Letby, this policy didn’t exist. It’s clear from what has been reported so far that this policy may have made a big difference – and could have prevented lives being lost.
But the role that management plays in cases such as this cannot be ignored. Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time that preventing reputational damage has been placed ahead of patient safety. Inquiries into various NHS scandals, such as at the Bristol Children’s hospital, highlighted management attempts to cover up failings in patient care and avoid negative publicity.
Even with the Freedom to Speak Up Policy, the British Medical Association reports that staff are still being victimised for raising concerns. Staff who raise concerns are often dismissed under the “some other substantial reason” (SOSR) clause which enables organisations, not just the NHS, to sack employees without needing to prove misconduct or incompetence. Clearly, the policy needs to be improved and legislation passed that would protect staff from dismissal if they do speak up.
In the aftermath of the Letby case, Brearey and Jayaram have both called for hospital managers to be regulated. Regulation would ensure that managers would need to be registered to practise in the same way as health professionals are. This would ensure that managers are held to account for their decisions and that action is taken if they’re found not to be acting in the interests of patient safety.
This will need a significant philosophical shift in the way the NHS is managed. Focus needs to be moved away from managing hospitals as businesses to putting patient safety first. Holding NHS managers to account for their decisions may well be the best way to do this.
Jane Tomkinson, Acting Chief Executive Officer at the Countess of Chester Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, said:
Following the trial of former neonatal nurse Lucy Letby, the Trust welcomes the announcement of an independent inquiry by the Department of Health and Social Care. In addition, the trust will be supporting the ongoing investigation by Cheshire Police. Due to ongoing legal considerations, it would not be appropriate for the Trust to make any further comment at this time.
Robin Lewis receives funding from NHS England Workforce Training end Education
<img src="https://www.mtlblog.com/media-library/dairy-and-eggs-section-at-a-grocery-store-in-canada.jpg?id=55831988&width=1200&height=600&coordinates=0%2C94%2C0%2C95"/><br/><br/><p>Montreal, it's time to check your kitchen cupboards because some popular foods are being <a href="https://www.mtlblog.com/tag/product-recall" target="_blank">recalled</a> for safety concerns. </p><p>The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has issued multiple <a href="https://www.mtlblog.com/food-recalls-quebec-cheese-salt-chocolate" target="_blank">food recalls in Quebec</a>, and this time the list includes popular basics like <a href="https://www.mtlblog.com/eggs-recalled-canada-a-salmonella-risk-2025" target="_blank">eggs</a>, chocolate, granola bars and more.</p><p>These recalls are happening for serious reasons — think <a href="https://www.mtlblog.com/salmonella-outbreak-pastry-recall-canada" target="_blank">salmonella contamination</a>, undeclared allergens like nuts, and even foreign objects like metal fragments in products. </p><p>Plus, major grocery chain house-label brands like No Name, IGA and Compliments are on the list, along with other big names like MadeGood and Milka — so it's worth double-checking your pantry to stay on the safe side.</p><p>Here's the full rundown on what's been recalled, why, and what you can do to protect yourself and your family.</p><h3>Cape Breton Oatcake Society oatcakes</h3><br/><img alt="Cape Breton Oatcake Society Oatcakes." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="159848ed822a67b89270dc13deac7452" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="4a885" loading="lazy" src="https://www.mtlblog.com/media-library/cape-breton-oatcake-society-oatcakes.png?id=55831836&width=980"/><p><strong>Recalled products:</strong></p><ul><li>Cape Breton Oatcake Society Oatcakes - English Toffee, 2-Pack — all codes where almond is not declared in the list of ingredients</li><li>Cape Breton Oatcake Society Oatcakes - English Toffee, 12 units (6 x 2 Packs) — all codes where almond is not declared in the list of ingredients</li></ul><p><strong>Recall reason: </strong>Cape Breton Oatcake Society is recalling batches of its English Toffee Oatcakes due to undeclared almonds. This recall affects products sold nationally and online. People with almond allergies should avoid eating these oatcakes, as they could cause serious or life-threatening reactions.</p><p><span></span>The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) notes that the recall was triggered by a consumer complaint, though no allergic reactions have been reported so far. If you have these oatcakes, check the label, and if almonds are not declared, you can return them to where you bought them.<span></span></p><p><strong>Last updated: </strong>January 22, 2025</p><p><a href="https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en/alert-recall/cape-breton-oatcake-society-brand-oatcakes-english-toffee-recalled-due-undeclared" target="_blank">Cape Breton Oatcake Society recall notice</a></p><h3>Various brands of eggs</h3><br/><img alt="No Name Large Size Eggs, 12." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4b1329b63380171f18a8c6d5ff3b9ca0" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="b7a50" loading="lazy" src="https://www.mtlblog.com/media-library/no-name-large-size-eggs-12.jpg?id=55831895&width=980"/><p><strong>Recalled products:</strong> </p><ul><li>Compliments Extra Large Size White Eggs, 12 eggs</li><li>Compliments Large Size White Eggs, 12 eggs</li><li>Compliments Large Size White Eggs, 18 eggs</li><li>Foremost Large Size Eggs, 18 eggs</li><li>Golden Valley Eggs Extra Large Size Eggs, 30 eggs</li><li>Golden Valley Eggs Jumbo Size Eggs, 20 eggs</li><li>Golden Valley Eggs Large Size Eggs, 2 x 30 eggs</li><li>Golden Valley Eggs Large Size Eggs, 30 eggs</li><li>Golden Valley Eggs White Extra Large Size Eggs, 18 eggs</li><li>Golden Valley Eggs White Large Size Eggs, 12 eggs</li><li>IGA Extra Large Eggs, 12 eggs</li><li>No Name Large Size Eggs, 12 eggs</li><li>No Name Large Size Eggs, 30 eggs</li><li>No Name Large Size Eggs, 30 eggs</li><li>unbranded XLW Loose Eggs/Box size XL, 15 dozen</li><li>unbranded SW Loose Eggs/Box size S, 15 dozen</li><li>unbranded Large White Eggs, 15 dozen</li><li>Western Family Extra Large Size White Eggs, 12 eggs</li><li>Western Family Large Size White Eggs, 30 eggs</li></ul><p><strong>Recall reason:</strong> Burnbrae Farms is recalling shell eggs sold under several brand names — Compliments, Foremost, Golden Valley Eggs, IGA, No Name and Western Family — due to potential salmonella contamination. The CFIA says these eggs were sold in B.C., Manitoba and Ontario, but that they could possibly have been distributed in other provinces and territories as well. The recall applies only to eggs with specific lot codes — you can check the recall notice below for the codes and best-before dates to look out for.</p><p>The CFIA notes that food contaminated with salmonella may not look or smell spoiled but can cause serious illness, particularly in young children, pregnant people, older adults and those with weakened immune systems. Symptoms can include fever, headache, nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps and diarrhea. No illnesses have been reported so far, but if you think you got sick from consuming these products, reach out to your health care provider.</p><p>If you have these recalled eggs, throw them out or return them to the store where you bought them. If you're unsure about your purchase, contact your retailer for clarification. </p><p><strong>Last updated:</strong> January 20, 2025</p><p><a href="https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en/alert-recall/certain-brands-shell-eggs-recalled-due-salmonella" target="_blank">Egg recall notice</a></p><h3>Sweet Cream mini pastries</h3><br/><img alt="" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b1195db73fd1bb847cc2208a368d431d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="860e6" loading="lazy" src="https://www.mtlblog.com/media-library/image.png?id=55831928&width=980"/><p><strong>Recalled products:</strong> </p><ul><li>Sweet Cream Mini Patisserie, ~4 kg (4 boxes x 30 pieces)</li><li>Sweet Cream Mini Patisserie – Tray A, 1 kg (30 pieces)</li><li>Sweet Cream Mini Patisserie – Tray B, 1 kg (30 pieces)</li></ul><p><strong>Recall reason:</strong> Importations Piu Che Dolci Inc. is recalling Sweet Cream-brand mini pastries due to salmonella contamination. These desserts were distributed in Alberta, British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec, both sold in stores and served in bakeries, hotels, restaurants, hospitals and at catered events. </p><p>The recall follows a <a href="https://www.mtlblog.com/salmonella-outbreak-pastry-recall-canada" target="_blank">serious illness outbreak</a> with 61 confirmed cases of salmonella poisoning between September and December 2024. So far, 17 people have been hospitalized, though no deaths have been reported. Symptoms can include fever, nausea, abdominal cramps and diarrhea, with higher risks for children, older adults, pregnant people and those with weakened immune systems. The CFIA notes that people who are infected with the bacteria can spread salmonella to other people up to several weeks after they become infected, even if they don't have symptoms.</p><p>The CFIA notes that the products may have been sold clerk-served or in smaller packages, with or without a label that may not have the brand and other identifying information. If you're unsure whether certain pastries you have are affected, contact the store where you bought them. The CFIA says it's still investigating the active outbreak, and further recalls may follow. </p><p><strong>Last updated:</strong> January 18, 2025</p><p><a href="https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en/alert-recall/sweet-cream-brand-mini-patisserie-recalled-due-salmonella" target="_blank">Sweet Cream recall notice</a></p><h3>Milka chocolate</h3><br/><img alt="" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="bb09d3bf454e7c345ba383ad361ba1ca" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="52be1" loading="lazy" src="https://www.mtlblog.com/media-library/image.jpg?id=55831937&width=980"/><p><strong>Recalled product:</strong> Milka Bubbly Alpine Milk "Chocolat", 90 g — best before April 25, 2025</p><p><strong>Recall reason:</strong> Bensus Imports is recalling Milka-brand Bubbly Alpine Milk Chocolat due to undeclared hazelnut, a potential allergen. These chocolate bars were sold in Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec.</p><p>The recall was triggered by a consumer complaint, and one allergic reaction has been reported so far. Consuming this product could cause serious or life-threatening reactions for people with hazelnut allergies. If you have this chocolate at home, check the label, and if hazelnuts are not listed, you can return it to the store. </p><p><strong>Last updated:</strong> January 14, 2025</p><p><a href="https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en/alert-recall/milka-brand-bubbly-alpine-milk-chocolat-recalled-due-undeclared-hazelnut" target="_blank">Milka recall notice</a></p><h3>MadeGood granola bars</h3><br/><img alt="MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip." class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="333534b275e3f3f237e7166b43c5b492" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" id="8e3be" loading="lazy" src="https://www.mtlblog.com/media-library/madegood-granola-bars-chocolate-chip.jpg?id=55832012&width=980"/><p><strong>Recalled products:</strong></p><ul><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Banana, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 1.5 kg</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 960 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 720 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 360 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 576 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Chocolate Chip, 720 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Chip Mini Granola Bars, 1.08 kg</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Chip Mini Granola Bars, 576 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Mixed Berry, 1.5 kg</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Mixed Berry, 960 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Mixed Berry, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Cookies & Crème Naturally Flavoured, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Granola Bars Strawberry Naturally Flavoured, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Birthday Cake Flavoured, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Birthday Cake Flavoured, 720 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Birthday Cake Flavoured, 480 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Birthday Cake Flavoured, 360 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Birthday Cake Flavoured, 1.34 kg</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Vanilla Flavour, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Vanilla Flavour, 720 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Cookie Crumble Flavour, 120 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Cookie Crumble Flavour, 720 g</li><li>MadeGood Chocolate Drizzled Granola Bars Variety Pack, 720 g</li><li>MadeGood MadeGood Variety, 35 count</li><li>MadeGood MadeGood Variety Pack, 7 count</li></ul><p><strong>Recall reason:</strong> Riverside Natural Foods Ltd. is recalling MadeGood-brand granola bars due to the presence of metal pieces. These bars were distributed nationally in stores and online, affecting both retail customers and institutions like hotels, restaurants and cafeterias.</p><p>Consumers are urged not to eat these granola bars as the contamination poses a physical hazard. If you have these products at home, throw them out or return them to the store where they were purchased. The recall applies to specific lots of these snacks — you can check the CFIA notice below for the codes and best-before dates to look out for.</p><p><strong>Last updated: </strong>December 12, 2024</p><p><a href="https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en/alert-recall/madegood-brand-granola-bars-recalled-due-pieces-metal" target="_blank">MadeGood recall notice</a></p><p></p><p><em>AI tools may have been used to support the creation or distribution of this content; however, it has been carefully edited and fact-checked by a member of MTL Blog's Editorial team. For more information on our use of AI, please visit our <a href="https://www.mtlblog.com/editorial-standards" target="_blank">Editorial Standards page</a>.</em></p>