Margaret Coats reputation! What reputation?

June 3, 2006
By

coats-on-sun Dixon says I have defamed Coats when I asked chiropractors in a forum topic if I should “give Margaret Coats the benefit of the doubt”, some of the comments have been less than complementary and I have been asked by Peter Dixon to remove them. The postings by Kola and Gus were not edited previously because they had used their real names and were posting about their own personal experience of Miss Coates. They like many registered chiropractors do not like Margaret Coats are of the opinion that she is a bully and have no confidence in her as registrar.

As Peter has asked me on behalf of the GCC, I have edited the personal remarks that they have objected to. However Peter Dixon also states “that comments that Miss Coats has been “economical with the truth” “behaved like a bully” “wasting members resources”; these statements are not only false but also seriously defamatory of MissCoats.

They suggest that she lied, acted illegally, is guilty of sharp practices, is unprofessional, unscrupulous and lacks moral integrity” Peter Dixon may interpret it like that, I believe the above are “fair comment”. Peter then states “you have published these "defamatory" statements with the direct intention of harming Miss Coats professional and personal reputation and also the GCC’ reputation” Causing her a great deal of distress and anxiety. We also ask you to provide within 7 days an apology and retraction to Miss Coats and an undertaking not to repeat the allegations or similar allegations.

I published many facts which suggest all is not as it should be at the GCC and Ibelieve Miss Coats is largly responsible for the mess, where should the buck stop and the GCC have done nothing to clear up the allegations of bullying against Miss Coats except deny the allegations and have provided no evidence of an investigation. An "investigation" that failed to interview the person who made the allegation. I will inform Gus and Kola of the GCC’s request, whether they want to remove the rest of their postings and apologise to Miss Coats is up to them. As regards their request for me to remove my postings. Only someone that was free and easy with facts, would read into my posting and conclude that I had implied that Miss Coats had put on a pair of hobnail boots and trampled over members like a latter day skin head and I should retract the statement and apologise.

I have no idea if Margaret Coats has as many pairs of shoes as Imelda Marcos or if her wardrobe includes a pair of "hobnail boots." My sentence I believe is called a metaphor, I repeated it six times in the context of innocent registered chiropractors who had their professional integrity brought into question by the GCC and the registrar. It reads “Did she give the benefit of doubt to Monica Handa when a women complained that she had been kept waiting for an appointment? No, she put on her hobnail boots and with her foot soldiers trampled all over the integrity of a good woman". For those at the GCC who took it literally to mean "she trampled all over members" in her "hobnail boots" what can I say. I hope you are not on the Investigating Committee. As for me comparing Miss Coats to a "child sex abuser"???

Last year I started a campaign to expose how the catholic church tried to cover up sex abuse at my old school. Initially everyone was baying for justice for the victims , however when the public saw the “paedophile priest” on TV being taken out of court in chains to begin his sentence “people started to feel sorry for the elderly priest and began asking should he be given the benefit of the doubt because “ignorance” may have contributed to his behavior, and that this “elderly man” may have been “unaware of the consequences of his actions”. I do not feel one ounce of pity for Margaret Coats or Gregory Price. Perhaps others do, in which case I probably wont get elected onto the GCC. I have not lied once on these forums and have no regrets for speaking out. Peter Dixon states "the GCC would rather focus its energies on working with the profession for the common good" So would I Peter, preferably without Miss Coats involvment.

Share Button

Related posts:

  1. Margaret Coats could care less about the chiropractic profession
  2. Peter Dixon tries to cover the mess
  3. Disclosure of evidence against chiropractors by the GCC. Not good enough according to the High Court.
  4. Making the complaint fit the GCC Code of Practice so charges can be brought.
  5. Before blind ambition messed up his brain GCC chairman Peter Dixon sounded like a reasonable chiropractor

Tags: ,

Follow

Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers: