On Thursday 07 Oct 2004 18:48, Dr Fay Wilson wrote:
> To
> my knowledge it is exceptional (uniquely so) for the GMC to refer
> externally for a CHRP second opinion on one of its own PCC's
> determinations (though they know that the CHRP will be doing this
> anyway). This may have been an attempt to forestall criticism but the
> consequences for retaining the confidence of the profession remain to
> be seen.
The previous Privy Council decision, that a single incident of
negligence in an unblemished long career should not lead to a finding
of Serious Professional Misconduct, was a civilised one in my opinion.
A decision by the CHRP to seek to overthrow it to meet the public's
desire for revenge would be barbaric.
That the GMC should actively invite the CHRP to do so is unlikely to
commend it to the profession it regulates.
But let's look on the bright side. No one has yet proposed giving Dr Bee
a custodial sentence, as happened in the Wayne Jowett case. What
unpropitious times for our profession. To misquote Larkin:
Man hands on misery to man
It deepens like a coastal shelf
Get out as quickly as you can
And don't let your kids be docs like yourself
--
Michael Leuty
Nottingham, UK
|