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

GPs risk action over medical reports

I write to express my anger at a letter from GMC president Professor Graeme Catto (May 7) in a response to an article about

Dr Jeff Featherstone and his unfortunate experience of a GMC complaint (News, April 23).

The problem was minor and related to communication. The patient had bypassed local resolution and taken her problem directly to the GMC.

I had a similar experience last year where a patient bypassed local resolution and took her vexatious complaint to the GMC. Like Dr Featherstone, I had to give my employment details past and present to the GMC. They each got a letter asking about my performance before the GMC decided that there was no case to answer.

I was angry that I could be put in this situation on the whim of a difficult patient. I wrote to Professor Catto to express my sense of injustice at the way my case was handled but he did not reply.

It took a second letter a month later before I got an obfuscatory reply from a case worker in Manchester. It seems that the good professor pays more attention

to the medical press than to his personal in-tray. Well done Pulse for getting him to reply!

I remain deeply unhappy about his self-satisfied reply which seems to imply that the GMC has a statutory responsibility to investigate all complaints.

This is surely a charter for difficult and malicious patients to make allegations which then lead to a spiral of paperwork and a stressful few months for the doctor. Can this be right or fair? What happened to the push towards local resolution? What about common-sense? This cannot enhance the standing of the GMC in the profession.

I tried to put my problems down to experience but the event has continued to trouble me both on a personal level and on the wider issue of natural justice.

Dr JM Inwood


Rate this article 

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

Have your say