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

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

Tribunal 'wrong' to allow doctor to continue to practise, GMC tells High Court

Comment

"trainee paediatrician" - So if a trainee has made a clinical error, then surely questions should be asked about the training and supervision provided, rather than making a scapegoat of one person. Who let this trainee on to the SHO/ registrar rota (interview panel, person designing the interview etc)? Should they be done for manslaughter or struck off? Who did their last supervision review/ ARCP? Should they be done for manslaughter or struck off? Who was the consultant that day, who delgated responsibility to this trainee? The GMC guidance clearly says that if you delegate (rather than refer) you retain ultimate responsibility for the action, therefore should this consultant be done for manslaughter or struck off? I am not trying to get everyone struck off, it just seems wrong that this particular person is being scapegoated. If the error was as a result of the trainee turning up drunk or taking a load of cocaine it might be a different issue. If it is related to clinical performance in a training role, then the other people listed above should be considered just as responsible as the person that they delegated the task to.

Posted date

08 Dec 2017

Posted time

1:12pm

required
required
required