Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 277 No 7420 p391
30 September 2006

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 40K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· Medical regulation
· PSNC
· Drug interactions
· Nutraceuticals
· Community pharmacy


Letters to the Editor

Medical regulation

A proper and principled concern for fairness

From Mr F. Scott

There is a danger of equating a proper and principled concern for fairness with “professional self-protectionism” (PJ, 16 September, p324).

The issue of standard of proof is not straightforward and it is helpful to look at the decisions of the UK’s most senior judges, including the law lords sitting as the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

In the case of Campbell versus Hamlet [2005] UKPC 19, which concerned a finding of misconduct by an attorney, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood stated that their lordships entertained no doubt that the criminal standard was the correct standard to apply to such proceedings.

Similarly, Lord Justice Richards, in the Court of Appeal judgment in re: AN [2005] EWHC 587 (Admin), stated: “Although there remains a distinction in principle between the civil standard and the criminal standard, the practical application of the flexible approach demonstrated in the authorities means that they are likely in certain contexts to produce the same or similar results. Indeed, there are exceptional situations in which, for reasons of policy or pragmatism, the actual criminal standard is used in civil proceedings, as in … certain disciplinary contexts (Campbell).”

The General Medical Council does not shirk from vigorous and effective action to enhance and promote patient safety and this year will spend over £40m on investigation and adjudication of complaints against doctors.

We are committed to processes and procedures that are fair, objective, transparent and free from unfair discrimination. Erasure from the register has profound implications for doctors. Sir Graeme Catto’s key point, expressed in ordinary language, is that we should be sure of the facts when erasure is being contemplated. This is wholly compatible with protecting patients and the public interest.

As the national regulator, the General Medical Council must command the confidence and support of all the main interests — patients and the public, doctors, the NHS and other health care providers, and medical schools and royal colleges. That is why, for example, Sir Graeme has announced the GMC’s commitment to a balanced composition for the council, reflective of those four main constituencies.

Finlay Scott
Chief Executive
General Medical Council

Send your letter to The Editor

Next Topic (PSNC)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal