This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

pul jul aug2020 cover 80x101px
Read the latest issue online

Independents' Day

13 doctors died while GMC 'failed to act' on suicides risk, review finds

The GMC should have ’immediately ceased’ their fitness-to-practise cases and ’urgently reformed’ processes after concerns were first raised about the high numbers of doctors taking their own life while under investigation, a new review has concluded.

The review, Suicide whilst under the GMC’s fitness-to-practise investigation: Were they preventable?, published in the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, suggests that there were 13 deaths by suicide while the GMC was conducting a review of its fitness-to-practise procedures. 

As such, GMC review last year of 28 doctors who died by suicide while under fitness-to-practise (FTP) investigation between 2005 and 2013 was ‘reactive’, when it could have been proactive.

The new review - written by Dr David Casey, a GP and a tutor in medical law, ethics and professionalism at the University of Central Lancashire, and Dr Kartina Choong, a senior lecturer in law and ethics at University of Central Lancashire - also criticises coroners for not raising FTP investigations as a possible suicide risk earlier.

The GMC’s review, led by Sarndrah Hosfall, the chief executive for the National Patient Safety Organisation, outlined a number of core recommendations that it needed to implement in order to improve its fitness-to-practise processes – in a bid to offer more support vulnerable doctors under investigation.

The review found:

  • Some doctors were receiving multiple letters from the GMC, with one doctor receiving up to five letters over a four-day period;
  • Many doctors felt the GMC’s tone was ’accusatory’, with a failure to show compassion;
  • Doctors felt they did not receive any support, and there was ‘minimal’ communication with them;
  • And there were unacceptable delays in investigating some concerns, in some cases leading to a higher risk of suicide.

But the new study claims that the concerns were first raised in 2012 by an FOI request by a psychiatrist, and that there should have been immediate action before the review was published in 2014.

In 2012, four doctors took their own life, with a further nine deaths by suicide the following year.

The study concluded: ’It is submitted that the interval between concerns about suicide being raised and the release of the report were unacceptable.’

It concluded that an ’immediate cessation in the active investigation of doctors by the GMC could have taken place with an emergency reform of the processes and assessment of the risk posed to these doctors could have been made’.

The authors added: ’The extrapolated effect of an immediate failure to act leaves no doubt that these further cases of suicide - 13 deaths - could have been managed differently. Thus although the GMC did commission an independent review in 2013, the report was ultimately reactive, not proactive.’

The study also suggests that the coroners service also failed to act in time – and argues that it did not detect the pattern of doctors that had died by suicide while under investigation by the regulator, adding that it should have alerted the GMC of the emerging trend.

However, it added that this did not absolve the GMC, which itself should have identified the high numbers of doctors taking their own life while under FTP investigations.

It concluded: ’That FTP investigation has never, prior to [2012], been isolated and identified as a distinct risk factor for physician suicide meant that practically nothing has been done to avert such deaths.

’As argued above, culpability for the omissions lies mainly with two parties: the coroners and the GMC itself.’

GMC chief executive Niall Dickson told Pulse: ‘This is a complex area and we entirely accept our responsibilities to everyone involved in our investigations. Of course we have to protect patients, but we also want to help doctors who are unwell and find themselves in this predicament – that is why we commissioned the independent review.

‘The truth is some doctors in our procedures have very serious health problems and are referred to us having already had ideas of taking their own lives. Often they are also having to deal with many other serious personal and professional issues. We do not need to be involved where the doctor is ill and it is being managed appropriately, but we do have a duty to act where patients could be at risk.’

He added that the GMC is working with the BMA and medical defence organisations to change its correspondence with doctors under investigation.

Last week, an inquest heard that a newly-qualified GP voted ‘Trainee GP of the Year’ hanged himself after fearing he would be struck off by the GMC for failing an alcohol test.

Readers' comments (59)

  • Get the CQC to inspect the GMC.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment






    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • there are undoubtedly vulnerable sick Doctors who have health issues and a predisposition to suicide referred to the GMC.
    There undoubtedly diligent and falsely accused Doctors who see the GMC "neutral" act of suspension as a punitive act and may react inappropriately.
    There is far too much "accusation" and "protect patients" in the GMC process- the balance needs to be retempered. Yes patients deserve safe doctors and should expect a right of redress for poor performance.
    GMC should however be better at prescreening , less prone to NEUTRAL suspension and accept it as the career blighting event.
    They should also communicate more fully with NHS England Performers list as the current triple jeopardy Doctors face, (Solicitors litigation, Performers list Sanction and GMC Investigation) can break the strongest most dilligent practitioner.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So, sorry but have no post anonymously for fear of gmc reprisals
    What is actually going to be done about the GMC and Mr Dickson's mantra of they all had problems before we investigated them....?
    Staggering that no one apart from this article is taking them to task and btw they are brave docs!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • There are sick people who are referred to the GMC who need support and may need to be removed from work for both their own and patients' safety and then there are perfectly mentally well doctors who are made suicidal by a complaint.
    I do not know of any other profession where the consequences of a complaint are so appalling and damaging. To suggest that this is only doctors who already have mental health problems is wrong. To use this as an excuse to absolve them of responsibility for causing such distress amounts ( in my view) to corporate manslaughter.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Careful GMC. At the moment you are tolerated by the majority of doctors, but only just. Why on earth I have to pay my judge, jury and executioner an annual fee is beyond me. Just as junior doctors have voted to strike in unprecedented numbers, the GMC better get its act together. It only takes a few repeated cock ups, to disillusion the whole profession and the profession can be bought together to completely boycott the GMC. What you going to do then? strike off 90% of all UK doctors? Recent events have shown that the new generation of doctors are bolder than ever and no longer afraid to stick their head out and unite as one big force. As I said be careful GMC-the next big strikes could be directed against you!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    I think we have said it all in the over 100 comments in the other article about DR Halcrow.
    Yes , it is always that politically correct statement that 'it is difficult to comment in individual cases' BUT this concern is gaining more and more momentum and clearly need a lot more cross examinations
    As I said ,GMC needs a lot more 'soul searching' in any case.........

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This highlights that the problem is much bigger than what it has been perceived so far. I have 3 observations:

    1) The Doctors committing suicide are likely just the tip of the iceburg. There are much more cases of mental ill health who need to be
    diagnosed early so that these suicides could be prevented.

    2) By definition, most suicides should be preventable. Who has thus responsibility? Doctor under FTP, their GP, BMA, GMC or all of them?

    3) Once a Dr undergoing GMC investigation is identified as mentally unwell, are they fit to continue attending the FTP proceedings? Should they be urgently referred to the Mental health team? Should the GMC have in house OH/ Psychological support for them?

    In any case, GMC needs to do much more to avoid such disasters in the future.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This comment has been removed by the moderator.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Dr's should bring a class-action on corporate manslaughter against the GMC and submit for all these cases to be reopened by the coroners.

    Folks, its not just personal, they're killing us. Je Suis Docteur.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say