At 10:24 PM 9/17/98 +0100, you wrote:
>[log in to unmask],Net wrote at 20:00 on 17/09/98
>about "Handwriting":
>-----------------------------
>GMC.
>Doctors in management in the HA have a duty to act if the
>illegibility is such as to risk damage to patients.
>If they don't, having been made aware of the seriousness of the
>problem, then they go to the GMC as well.
>Perhaps they replied that everything in their bailiwick was
>shipshape and Bristol fashion?
>--- OffRoad 1.9r registered to Adrian Midgley
Haven't we just agonised over what unwarranted complaints can do to Drs.
One version of events and we suggest GMC?????
If there are concerns about handwriting first would be phone calls which I
presume have been done from your posting. These should of course be
documented.
Second would be return of scripts for improving legibility with record kept
of return.
Third would be letter to doctor using codes such as "serious concern that
care of patients may be jeopordised." As has already been said care of
patients is in fact only jeopordised in this situation if both doctor *and*
pharmacist are incompetent. Otherwise this is more likely just a cause of
incovenience.
Fourth would be a letter to a senior local person. Could be chair of LMC,
chair of PCG I suppose, might even be HA I guess.
If you go straight to GMC without making every effort to help, quite
rightly local doctors will never trust you again. As to responsibilities
of doctors in management I think GMC advice makes it quite clear that there
*is* an expectation that people will try and sort out problems locally
first in the vast majority of situations. Trying to help a colleague with
handwriting problems is not the same as covering up or ignoring deaths for
year after year after year.
If this is really your approach wouldn't want to work near you Midge.
JB
JB
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|