Newsletter
Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
Poll
Jobs
Policy | Charity & Fundraising | Research | Education | Executive | Media | Social Care | Communications
User login
GMC pushes ahead with secret doctors' courts plan
Plans to hold some misconduct hearings in private look set to go ahead.
By Andrew Pugh Published 13 June 2011
The General Medical Council looks set to press ahead with plans to hold some misconduct hearings behind closed doors.
Earlier this year the GMC launched a consultation on its plans for a fundamental reform of its fitness to practice procedures and it published the results last week.
Under new proposals, hearings in which there is no dispute over the facts of the case would be settled behind closed doors between doctors and the GMC.
This was opposed by both the Newspaper Society and the Society of Editors.
Read more at the Press Gazette.
From the magazine
-
Samira Shackle -
Ryan Gilbey -
Will Self -
Jason Cowley -
Sophie Elmhirst -
Martha Gill -
Rafael Behr -
George Eaton -
Rafael Behr -
Mehdi Hasan
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists
2 comments
Hmm. Honi soit qui mal y pense, one wonders? Perhaps this scenario could be an appropriate place and time to raise, share and thoroughly thrash out the kinds of concerns that frustrate and make a mockery of all our best endeavours. For example, I'm concerned plain citizens ie just as we are, can't apparently get involved with the GMC consultations - even though what these doctors do is supposed to be about us first. One wonders however what might happen should the context ever arise whereby without some vital if nugatory bit of information (which could only have come from the very ones excluded from meaningful dialogue) a doctor or medical type professional concern may be otherwise left wonting eg prosecution.
"If it's about me, involve me" went the shout as a result of all our diversity and equality type measures not so long ago. So what happened?
On further reflection what about our consent? Sometimes this gets confused (in my experience) with something more akin to a financial product in spite of the codes of conduct all citizens may peruse eg see NMC. ( I perhaps should point out some of the so-called consent forms that get dished out so often from a range of apparently respectable providers aren't proper forms at all. On the face of it they're often apparently unregulated and nigh on impossible to sort out, in my experience)
In fact in my view as a reasonable common citizen - the worlds awash with bits of paper some of which are certainly not capable of enabling an apparently targeted viewer or potential signatory to follow any (necessarily) true and correct trail of accountability.
Our Information Commissioner has been positively shouting at us to take more care about the personal details we provide to others. So in view of the latest utterances re the NHS reforms..
If we're to tinker once more with the legal responsibility of the health secretary for the overall performance of the NHS then more clarification about the lines of his/her accountability to Parliament may be necessary please. And with monitor available to help identify potential improvement things should work better when we can see a reasonable need for alternative provision ie choice
Frankly, in my view of the mess some people employed appointed or otherwise can make of what goes on in NHS premises/grounds and/or in the name of the NHS, we should be glad the GMC are looking at ways to review misconduct that might in effect be private.Some people might simply be unable to describe what might have gone on otherwise..
Hence, Honi soit qui mal y pense.
Post new comment