GMC updates guidance to ensure greater clarity and consistency in handling fitness-to-practice concerns.
The General Medical Council has published new guidance to provide greater clarity and consistency in the way it handles fitness-to-practise concerns.
“Protecting the public is at the heart of what we do. This new and updated guidance will make it easier for our case examiners and decision makers to apply our principles fairly and consistently, while at the same time maintaining patient safety,” said Anthony Omo, general counsel and director of fitness to practise at the GMC.
Overall, the GMC’s thresholds for fitness to practise concerns remain unchanged. But it does mean that, for the first time, a single set of principles will be applied by all GMC fitness to practise decision-makers.
It will also bring the guidance for decisions about doctors into line with how cases involving physician associates and anaesthesia associates are considered.
A transparent approach
Publication of updated guidance follows on from last year when the GMC updated its guidance for decision makers looking at concerns relating specifically to violence and dishonesty, giving them more discretion on case outcomes that represent a lower risk to public protection.
Applying the framework means the decision on whether information received about a doctor will proceed to an investigation, and potential tribunal will focus on three questions. What is the seriousness of the concern? What is the impact of any relevant context? And how has the doctor responded? Such as showing insight and remediation.
“By being transparent about our approach we are making it easier for doctors, complainants and the public to understand how we assess concerns and reach decisions about a doctor’s fitness to practise,” Ovo continued.
