Am I missing something, or does the following seem logical?
1, Dr Bawa-Garba is deemed now to be unfit to practice because she has been out of clinical work for so long.
2. Dr BG has only been out of work because the GMC, unlawfully as has subsequently been decided in the courts, struck her off.
3. Hence it has been the negligent practice of the GMC that has resulted in her inability to work and therefore become unsuitable to practice.
4 (a) The GMC owed Dr BG a duty of care
(b) The GMC have failed in that duty
(c) Dr BG has suffered damage as a direct result of (b), both financial and personal.
5. Dr GB has a case in tort against the GMC and should seek remedy in the civil courts.
7. Dr BG SHOULD SUE THE GMC
Thanks to the ill-made decision of the GMC the Adcock family and Dr Bawa-Gaba have all yet again had to endure more expense and suffering going through our yo-yo legal system.
Now it is time for the GMC to be reassessed and brought into line. Their actions have been nothing short of shameful in the Bawa case (and Meadow 2005). Not only have they demonstrated incompetence and bad judgement, but they have also shown their arrogance in their decision to disregard the declared intention of HM government to repeal Section 40A of the 1983 Medical Act and will continue to appeal their own MPTS decisions as and when they choose. Doctors are rightly encouraged to look at and learn from their mistakes, but do the GMC? Have they learnt from the Williams Committee Report? NO. Do they really listen to the Profession ?? I wonder. Time for change.
Totally vindicated on the count of soliciting murder and rightly so. How could the DPP have sanctioned the go ahead on such a case?
As to the 3 emails: read them. Do they pose any threat to the financial adviser whatsoever? No! The only person clearly at risk and vulnerable was the writer. No physical attempt was made to confront the adviser and to claim that he was harassed is ridiculous. The only anxiety that might have been caused to him was by the police notifying that his name was on a spam website.
What a travesty that such a good, competent and caring doctor of over 35 years standing should be publicly trailed though the mud like this. The victim has been the doctor - no one else.
GMC Trumpism! The arrogant, bullying and blatant disregard for everyone elses' opinion, including that of the Executive and Judiciary, let alone almost the entire profession might just as well come from the White House. If the GMC feel that the tribunals that they appoint in the first place get it wrong, then it is up to GMC to educate them as to their expected performance. The GMC owe the public, profession and their tribunal members a duty of care. Evidently the GMC is failing in its duty of care in this respect. Some unfortunate doctors are suffering considerable damage as a result. Grounds for a case in tort?
The only way to get this work is by throwing cash at it. I don't know that 100m is enough or not but if they get GPs to fill the breach again it will only sap an already depleted pool. The primary work for a GP lies in General Practice. Bailing out secondary care is not our job. Primary care will suffer but one wonders if the powers that be really care?
I know that I have become increasingly cynical of late, but in my view this is exactly what Government wants and has been Mr Hunt's hidden agenda all along. If the Junior Doctors refuse to work the new contract and the NHS becomes unworkable the Government will claim to have been "forced" to disband it and replace it with a private alternative. Just what they wanted all along, but did not wish to be seen as the one responsible (although they will be) for destroying the NHS. Typically Government will seek to blame someone else - in this case the Junior Doctors.
No doubt there will be a huge waste of valuable appointments given the absurd algorithms and inadequately trained 111 staff. An appointment with a GP will become the easy coverall for problems not clearly allocatable elsewhere.
I assume that no Practice has a surfeit of appointments so it really has to be financially worth while going for. Given the cost of a locum (if you can find one) to do a surgery of 16 to 20 patients it should be quite easy to work out how inadequate the remuneration is. Furthermore once established as part of the system how easy will it be to stop when funding evaporates.
Another pathetic idea when the only solution is more Gps and adequate funding of General practice on the first place.
Who of they employ to think up these ideas!
Excellent. A really helpful trio of caveats. Sorry my rating appears a one star, I tried to correct it to a deserved 5*
I retired from clinical practice 12 months ago and I can assure you its bloody fantastic, but then so was General Practice 5 to 10 years ago. What went wrong? I do not believe that cash was the major issue (although I accept that now it maybe with the progressive eking away at pay). The issue was; (1) Over interference by government in our day-to day work. Introducing so many extraneous new tasks and distractions (days off sitting on committees) resulting in little time left in the consultation to address the patient’s agenda. (2) The gradual destruction of our professional status and image by deliberate government spin supported by the media. Combined they have destroyed public confidence in the profession, and GPs in particular.
As to cash incentives to encourage GPs to stay on: remember the offer some years back of £10K to continue in practice from 60 to 65 yrs of age. Taxed at 40% = £6000, i.e. £1.64 per day! What planet were the government advisers on? What market research had they done? Obvious none!
This comment has been deleted
There is too much to raise the GPs' blood pressures these days. Personally I had a good chuckle at the Prof's expense. I thought all the Sir Lancelots were long gone. It's rather charming that there are still one or two left in the woodwork. Surely no one takes him seriously.
I owe a debt to Jeremy Hunt. His comments regarding the out of hours debacle focused my mind. I resigned from the NHS. It was one in a long line of frustrations and dissapointments, and this complete falicy aimed to misinform the public and deflect their attention from government's failings was for me the straw that broke the camel's back.
Dr Ho's comment regarding solidarity of the profession hits the spot. If you don't speak with one voice you (and the NHS) will loose. Take the recent suggestion that GP practices should contribute to their Registrar's salary. All Trainers MUST resign from traing if this issue is persued.