 |
 |
Dr Peter von Kaehne wrote: > That makes sense. Having said this I find it odd that a totally private > matter, neither contractual nor statutory duty, is suddenly elevated to > this status. Particularly when there is significant disquiet about the > form as such (lnot the matter of cremation) and a fair number of people > been on record that the profession could simply cease to provide this > form until matters are finally improved. Is this pre-emptive? Will there > come a time when filling in of part C is also obligatory? > > Form B (Scottish Part one) is fine AFAICS. To a considerable extent it is what a medical certificate of cause of death is likely to become. There is only one doctor who may complete it, so this is a bottleneck. Form C and the process around completing it is not fit for its purpose, and completing it is hazardous to doctors, and not a contractual or in any way which I can see ethical or GMC-interestable matter. I am unwilling to urge a colleague to complete a Form C - I'd have trouble doing so after reaching the conclusion that it is dangerous. I'm also of the view that if one is going to, a properly (certifiably by a mathematician or similar expert) random selection would be a good counter to any argument about cosy arrangements. Both of those points indicate that it is best left to someone else to advertise or solicit completion of form C. "I am not available at present/do not care to bid for this work" seems a reply which it is hard to turn into malfeasance. "My partners/wife/cat regard my workload as excessive and have forbidden me to accept additional work, this is additional work" also seems hard to reasonably object to, although cats do not always cooperate by confirming that their staff have been instructed so. As a cremation (deputy) referee I regard the lack of coercion as a safeguard, and if a doctor is under pressure to complete a form it should be relied upon rather less than if they freely[1] do so. [1] there is that problem with English again. -- A