NOTIFICATION OF CONVICTIONS OF MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS TO THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL

Aims and MethodsThe UK's Driver Vehicle Licensing Authority (DVLA) requires individuals to report if they have a medical condition such as alcohol dependence. General Medical Council guidance indicates that medical practitioners should ensure patients are aware of their impairment and requirement to notify the DVLA.ResultsIn a survey of 246 people with known alcohol dependence, none were aware of advice on driving given by medical practitioners and none had self-reported. In addition, 362 doctors, either attending a college symposium or visiting a college website, were asked about their knowledge of DVLA regulations regarding alcohol dependence: 73% of those attending the symposium and 63% of those visiting the website answered incorrectly. In Scotland, over 20000 people have alcohol dependence (over 1 million people with alcohol abuse), yet only 2548 people with alcohol problems self-reported to the DVLA in 2011.Clinical implicationsIf the DVLA regulations were implemented, it could make an enormous difference to the behaviours of the driving public.

Download Full-text

Suggestions for rendering Medico-Mental Science available to the better Administration of Justice and the more effectual Prevention of Lunacy and Crime

Journal of Mental Science ◽

10.1192/bjp.14.67.334 ◽

1868 ◽

Vol 14 (67) ◽

pp. 334-345 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

T. Laycock

Keyword(s):

Medical Science ◽

Modern Society ◽

General Medical Council ◽

Formal Proof ◽

Medical Council ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

Administration Of Justice ◽

The Subject ◽

The Law ◽

The Government

That medico-mental science is often at variance with the doctrines and decisions of the courts of law is a fact too well known and too generally admitted to need formal proof. It is almost as generally assumed that the scandalous failures of justice, which too often result, must be attributed to the defective education and knowledge of the profession. It is alleged that, as a body, we are for the most part ignorant and theoretical in matters relating to insanity, and if not ignorant, then presuming, and often using the little knowledge we possess, rather with the intent to rescue thieves and murderers from the legal consequences of their crimes than to help the administration of justice. It is certainly a fact which many of us lament that the corporate bodies of the profession generally, including the general medical council, ignore the subject as a distinct department of medical education; and consequently medical practitioners, not being duly trained, do sometimes appear to great disadvantage in courts of law. Medical shortcomings are not, however, the subject of my paper, but certain fundamental defects in the principles and procedures of the law which render medico-mental science sometimes even worse than useless, and always less useful to the commonweal than it might be, if rightly adapted to the needs of modern society. Nor would it be difficult to show that some of the crime and folly which occupies our courts and fills our reformatories, prisons, workhouses, and lunatic asylums, is capable of prevention by a well-devised use of medico-mental science. As these matters are wholly beyond the powers of the profession, I shall ask leave to move at the close of the discussion that a committee be appointed, with power to take such steps as may be thought necessary to secure a thorough inquiry by the Government into the relations of medical science to the administration of the law in regard to all persons mentally disordered or defective, with a view to such improvements as may be practicable.

Download Full-text

Clinical standards and the wider quality agenda

Psychiatric Bulletin ◽

10.1192/pb.24.3.85 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 24 (3) ◽

pp. 85-89 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Paul Lelliott

Keyword(s):

Medical Practice ◽

General Public ◽

Self Regulation ◽

General Medical Council ◽

Medical Council ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

Professional Self ◽

The Media ◽

The Government

There is an unprecedented level of interest among the general public, the media and politicians in the quality of treatment and care provided by the NHS. Traditional methods for upholding the quality of medical practice, through professional self-regulation, are under attack. The General Medical Council (GMC) has responded by voting to introduce a process of revalidation for medical practitioners. If this is not seen to succeed, the Government could take this responsibility away from the GMC, and the Medical Colleges and Faculties.

Download Full-text

Language (Knowledge of English)

Professional Conduct Casebook ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198817246.003.0050 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Kenneth Hamer

Keyword(s):

English Language ◽

General Medical Council ◽

Medical Council ◽

House Of Commons ◽

Language Competence ◽

Out Of Hours ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

Language Tests ◽

Briefing Paper ◽

Language Knowledge

The requirement for the necessary standard of competence in the English language, initially for medical practitioners, was recommended by the House of Commons Health Committee as set out in the Committee’s Report, The Use of Overseas Doctors in Providing Out of Hours Services (5th Report, Session 2009–10). The report proposed that changes be made to legislation to allow the General Medical Council (GMC)—and subsequently other healthcare regulators—to test the English language competence of practitioners applying for registration. The report followed the death of a patient, Mr David Gray, in 2008 when the treating physician, Dr Ubani, administered ten times the recommended maximum dose of diamorphine. Dr Ubani, a German national, spoke minimal English. The incident occurred during his first shift as an out-of-hours doctor for a general practitioner (GP) service provider. Persons seeking registration in the healthcare and other professions may be required by their regulator to prove that they are proficient in English. Legislation provides for applicants to provide evidence of English language capability as part of the registration process and where concerns about language have been identified. Regulators will refuse a licence to practise in circumstances in which the necessary knowledge of English cannot be demonstrated. For further details, see Language Tests for Healthcare Professionals, Briefing Paper (House of Commons Library 2018, No. 07267, 7 March 2018).

Download Full-text

Legal aspects of consent to treatment and the nature of malpractice claims in the United Kingdom

10.1093/med/9780199682874.003.0135 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1597-1604

Author(s):

Mark Ashley

Keyword(s):

General Medical Council ◽

Case Law ◽

Legal Aspects ◽

Medical Council ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Malpractice Claims ◽

Consent To Treatment ◽

Consent To Medical Treatment ◽

The Uk

The UK law on consent to medical treatment is derived from statutes (acts of parliament and their subordinate statutory instruments) and case law which develops as individual cases are decided by the courts. Regard must also be had to guidance published by the General Medical Council, which all UK-registered medical practitioners are expected to follow. Further detailed guidance on consent is provided by the Royal College of Surgeons.

Download Full-text

50 A Cross-Sectional Study Examining the Association Between MRCS Performance and Surgeons Receiving Fitness to Practice Sanctions

British Journal of Surgery ◽

10.1093/bjs/znab259.839 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽

Author(s):

R Ellis ◽

D Scrimgeour ◽

J Cleland ◽

A Lee ◽

P Brennan

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Royal College ◽

Risk Group ◽

General Medical Council ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Early Career ◽

Disciplinary Action ◽

Medical Council ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Medical Practitioners

Abstract Aim Fitness to practice (FtP) investigations by the General Medical Council (GMC) can be one of the most stressful experiences in a surgeon’s career. Demographic factors are known to alter the likelihood of GMC investigation. Despite this there are no studies assessing risk factors in surgeons for FtP sanctions. Thus, we used the newly created Intercollegiate Membership of Royal College of Surgeons (MRCS) examination database to identify risk factors for and the prevalence of GMC sanctions in early-career surgeons. Method FtP sanction data contained in the GMC list of registered medical practitioners (LRMP) database was linked at person-level to all UK graduates who had attempted MRCS Part A or Part B between September 2007 and January 2020. Data were anonymised by the Royal College of Surgeons of England prior to analysis. Results f 11,660 candidates who had attempted the MRCS within the study period only 31 (0.3%) candidates had GMC FtP sanctions within the last two years. Of these, 12 had active conditions on their registration, 7 had active undertakings and 14 had warnings. Candidate demographics were similar between cohorts and there were no significant differences between MRCS performance identified. Conclusions In this, the largest study of MRCS candidates to date, the prevalence of active FtP sanctions in early-career surgeons was 0.3%, significantly lower than the prevalence of sanctions across more experienced UK surgeons (0.9%). These data highlight early-career surgeons as a low-risk group for disciplinary action and should reassure patients and medical professionals of the rarity of FtP sanctions.

Download Full-text

Jackson, George, (23 Aug. 1843–12 May 1931), JP; late Member of General Medical Council (Direct Representative); late President, Incorporated Medical Practitioners’ Association, and of Plymouth Medical Society, President, South-Western Branch, British Medical Association, 1904–05; Vice President Poor Law Medical Officers Association; late President, now Vice President and Member of Council Public Vaccinators Association; Hon. Treasurer, Plymouth Branch, League of Nations Union

10.1093/ww/9780199540884.013.u211826 ◽

2007 ◽

Keyword(s):

Medical Association ◽

General Medical Council ◽

Vice President ◽

League Of Nations ◽

British Medical Association ◽

Medical Society ◽

Medical Council ◽

Poor Law ◽

Medical Practitioners

Download Full-text

Jurisdiction

Professional Conduct Casebook ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198817246.003.0049 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Kenneth Hamer

Keyword(s):

Forensic Pathology ◽

General Medical Council ◽

Medical Council ◽

Professional Conduct ◽

Home Office ◽

Medical Practitioners ◽

Contractual Arrangements ◽

Healthcare Professions ◽

Royal Charter ◽

Set Up

Regulatory and disciplinary bodies derive their jurisdiction from various sources, such as under statute, the royal prerogative, royal charter, or by contract with their members. The healthcare professions are governed by statute. In addition to the General Medical Council (GMC) and the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS), the regulations relating to professional conduct matters concerning the General Dental Council (GDC), the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC, the General Osteopathic Council (GOsC), and the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) are all derived from statute. Architects are regulated under a statutory scheme and many professions, including accountants, actuaries, engineers, and surveyors, are regulated by professional bodies incorporated under royal charter. The Home Office Police Board for Forensic Pathology and the Council for the Registration of Forensic Pathologists are set up under the royal prerogative. See generally Meadow v. General Medical Council [2007] QB 462, at [28]–[29]. The disciplinary regulations for other bodies, such as the Jockey Club (governed by royal charter), the National Greyhound Racing Club, and the British Boxing Board of Control, are governed by contractual arrangements.

Download Full-text