This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

CAMHS won't see you now

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

Doctors practise in 'a climate of fear' after Bawa-Garba case, says GMC review chair

Comment

The statement from Justice Bean today is monumental: Lord Justice Bean said in the judgement that the MPTS ‘were well placed to make an evaluative judgment of the nuances of how the various individuals had interacted and that judgment should have been accorded great weight, not only by the court but by the GMC in deciding whether to bring an appeal at all’. He added: ‘The discretion given by section 40A(3) to appeal against any decision which the GMC consider not sufficient for the protection of the public is a wide one, but in my view it is a discretion to be exercised with restraint where it involves a challenge to a finding of fact in the practitioner’s favour.’ ...................................... The meaning of ‘ discretion to be exercised with restraint where it involves a challenge to a finding of fact in the practitioner’s favour ‘ is far reaching. This comment has literally labelled GMC as ‘anti-practitioner’ in line of its vigilante-obsession to be the ‘protector of the public’ ( rather than the guardian of GMC regulations’ ). This obsession had gone unchallenged such that any doctor committed a mistake but exonerated by MPTS on fitness to practise , would go under the microscope of GMC which considered the doctor as a danger to the public fundamentally . Based on this ideology , it is hard to see GMC will ‘reflect’ and ‘redeem’ upon this criticism from the Appeal Court . .................... Fundamentally, there is a marked difference in the interpretation of ‘fitness to practise ‘ between MPTS and GMC on numerous occasions. You wonder why? Remember, this is a pattern that keeps repeating itself. The two regulatory bodies are , in essence, fighting to discredit each other . So what is the endgame here ? As being alluded in previous comments , this cannot prevent conspiracy theorists from speculating that certain group was ‘gaining’ out of this chaos . After all , demeanour of GMC is never short of belligerence , bigotry and brutality . In addition to the failure in providing explanations for the hefty casualties through suicide during previous FTP proceedings , there is sufficient ground to call for an independent inquiry .

Posted date

17 Sep 2018

Posted time

9:41pm

required
required
required