This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

Gold, incentives and meh

GMC unfair to attacked doctors

I disagree with Sir Michael Buckley (Letters, November 10). I think it is very unfair for my name, age and home address to be given when the patient remains as patient X. The doctor's anonymity should be maintained even in an ordinary court.

The GMC also advises the press in advance which is neither necessary nor fair.

In my case, the patient's social workers were able to make allegations even though they were not in the room when the assault by the patient took place.

They had even shredded their original notes. The patient had no injuries whereas the police constable and I had multiple injuries. The allegations appeared on the front-page in the local paper here.

Not one item of my statement was reported. All I got was a half-inch paragraph stating 'Doc cleared'.

The GMC listens to the most ill-founded allegations, yet I have never seen any advice from them on how to deal with the violent, drunk, psychiatric, manic, life-threatening patients who attack doctors.

I think the GMC's system of dealing with doctors is exceedingly unfair. We must be allowed to remain anonymous like the patient, unless and until anything is proved. This method of dealing with a case creates immense strain for the doctor and his family.

Dr CHG Gould


Northern Ireland

Rate this article  (5 average user rating)

Click to rate

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

0 out of 5 stars

Readers' comments (1)

  • GMC have got ‘previous’
    more to the point have continuing ‘contemporaneous’.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say