New guidance to provide greater clarity and consistency in the way the General Medical Council (GMC) handles fitness to practise concerns has been published.
Updates to a range of guidance, which come into effect Friday 30 May, are for the regulator’s case examiners and key decision makers, and will provide them with a framework for assessing whether concerns received by the GMC mean a doctor may pose a 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 clear questions:
- What is the seriousness of the concern? Features that might increase the seriousness can include repeated behaviour, abuse of position or involving vulnerable individuals.
- What is the impact of any relevant context? For example their working environment or personal circumstances.
- How has the doctor responded? Such as showing insight and remediation.
Overall, the GMC’s thresholds for fitness to practise concerns are unchanged. But it means that, for the first time, a single set of core 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.
Anthony Omo, General Counsel and Director of Fitness to Practise at the General Medical Council, said: "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.
"And 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."
The publication of updated guidance follows on from last year when the GMC published 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.
Anthony Omo added: "This work reinforces our ongoing commitment to deliver a fitness to practise process that is fair, flexible and compassionate, as well as effective."
The updated guidance is available to read on the GMC’s website.
