If feedback we are getting is to be relied on, Dr Grant referred one of his patients to a specialist, Dr Andrew Brooks, who turned out to be unbelievably bad, not only not helping the patient in any way, but doing him considerable harm, all, it would appear, so Dr Brooks could earn a fee of $3,200 for less than an hour’s work.
And, in relation to this, Dr Grant has shown not an iota of regret or concern for the patient, despite the many emails sent to him seeking a response.
We’re not sure of a number of things, but two things are certain.
Firstly, one of the many preposterous things about of Dr Brooks is that he says that while some can use his email address on his website to send him stuff, it’s set up to detect and screen out emails from patients so he doesn’t get them – patients have to fax him. We know this because that’s what he told the NSW Privacy Commissioner’s office when it contacted him. (When we asked our technical advisers when this was technically possible, they couldn’t stop laughing!)
Secondly, one of the more preposterous things about Dr Grant, and it’s an indication of his attitude he’s taken all along, is that when the patient asked him to pass on any emails to Dr Brooks – it would only take his receptionist a few seconds – his request wasn’t even acknowleged.
(This request was made by the patient on the assumption that Dr Brooks’ email set up wouldn’t detect and screen out emails from GPs, and because it would save the patient from getting in his car and driving through heavy traffic to the nearest OfficeWorks store, waiting in queues, waiting for fax numbers to start working, paying fees and so on.)
As we say, it was not even acknowledged.
It seems that Dr Brooks is his mate and it’s all about this taking precedence over any concerns for this particular patient’s welfare, and perhaps the welfare of other patients – it’s all about not upsetting his mate.
We would love to discuss the things we don’t know for sure in emails with Dr Grant – phone and face to face discussions are no good, as they don’t provide us with anything that can be relied on and/or passed on to our readers. (According to our feedback, Dr Brooks already has a track record of saying things in consultations, and then putting in writing things that are almost the opposite.) It would be so easy for him to set us right on anything we’re getting wrong. But, as I say, Dr Grant has not shown the slightest interest in doing this.
As to whether Dr Grant would be a good person for them to consult and/or use – we’ll leave it to our readers to decide for themselves about that, on the basis of what’s already available.