Most UK Doctors Lack Confidence in GMC, Survey Finds
Most doctors surveyed by the British Medical Association (BMA) this month expressed lack of confidence in the General Medical Council's (GMC) ability to protect the public. Four-fifths of those polled backed creating a replacement body.
Following years of scandals and disputes involving the GMC, the poll reflects growing dissatisfaction within the profession regarding the regulator's performance.
Out of 1404 respondents, only 16.1% agreed the GMC was fulfilling its statutory duty of public protection. A majority of 61.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed.
When asked whether a new regulator should be established dedicated solely to doctors, 82.2% supported the idea. Only 5.6% opposed it.
Regulation of PAs and AAs Cited as a Major Issue
The survey, conducted between 13 and 16 June, attracted 1539 BMA member responses.
Professor Philip Banfield
Highlighting the results on Monday at the association's annual representative meeting, chair of council Professor Philip Banfield said that a prominent source of dissatisfaction lay in the GMC's approach to regulating physician associates (PAs) and anaesthesia associates (AAs).
Banfield said there is no national scope of practice or clear limits on what associates can do. The BMA had collected more than 600 'shocking examples' of unsafe practices by associates. These included the widespread prescribing of medicines, inappropriate referrals for ionising radiation, and cases of avoidable patient harm and death.
"But in the face of mounting evidence, coroners' reports, and legal challenges, the NHS continues to bury its head in the sand and refuses to introduce the most rudimentary safety measures,' he said.
In a scathing critique of the GMC's role as professional regulator, Banfield asked, 'Who the hell is charge?' In place of accountability, there is "just a dangerous game of pass the parcel where the music never stops', he told delegates.
Banfield compared the blurring of lines between doctors and PAs to the failings of the Horizon IT system at the Post Office. He called for a public inquiry into the issue, with full statutory powers to hold those responsible to account.
Joint Regulation Spurs Professional Boundary Concerns
The BMA opposed the GMC becoming the joint statutory regulator for doctors and associates. This arrangement took effect in December 2024 despite opposition from many medical organisations.
In April, the BMA lost a High Court challenge against the GMC's decision to issue a single set of professional standards for doctors and associates. The court ruled that the arrangement was 'logical and lawful'. The BMA branded it "irrational and misleading".
The GMC duly updated its Fitness to Practise Rules to embrace doctors under the same standards as associates.
Banfield told conference delegates that the result of joint regulation had been "incessant and unsafe blurring of professional boundaries that threaten the very foundations of practising medicine".
BMA Calls for New Doctor-only Regulator
The GMC has failed doctors and patients for too long, he said. The BMA is calling for a new independent regulator solely for doctors that is 'unburdened by the abject failure of what the GMC has become'.
The new body must regain the profession's confidence, protect patients, treat doctors fairly, and place them at the heart of its decisions, he said.
Banfield also urged the government to address doctor unemployment in the NHS 10-year plan. He highlighted ongoing issues with specialty bottlenecks causing resident doctor unemployment.
This is "another debacle that the NHS and its paymasters have been aware of for years, but haven't lifted a finger to resolve, let alone taken any responsibility for", he said.
GMC Response to Criticism
A GMC spokesperson said: "We take our role working with doctors to support good, safe patient care very seriously. Our aim is to deliver effective, relevant and compassionate regulation.'
The GMC welcomed the "much-needed" reform of the regulatory framework. "Making further changes to the way we work will continue to benefit patient safety and ensure the public has confidence in the doctors we regulate," the spokesperson added.
Historical Criticisms of GMC's Performance
Calls to replace the GMC as medical regulator are not new. A BMJ opinion article from November 2022 described it as " failing patients and doctors for 30 years ".
Professor Aneez Esmail and Dr Sam Everington called the GMC a dysfunctional organisation that 'serves only itself". They criticised the GMC's handling of criticism as a ' performative masterclass ,' involving denial, citing lack of evidence, commissioning predictable research, and producing 'an endless series of reports so that it can wring its hands in false contrition and promise that change will come'.
In a follow up opinion article Dr Kamran Abbasi, BMJ editor in chief, noted that despite repeated promises, past GMC leadership had failed to implement recommendations from multiple reviews and inquiries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
9 hours ago
- Medscape
Most UK Doctors Lack Confidence in GMC, Survey Finds
Most doctors surveyed by the British Medical Association (BMA) this month expressed lack of confidence in the General Medical Council's (GMC) ability to protect the public. Four-fifths of those polled backed creating a replacement body. Following years of scandals and disputes involving the GMC, the poll reflects growing dissatisfaction within the profession regarding the regulator's performance. Out of 1404 respondents, only 16.1% agreed the GMC was fulfilling its statutory duty of public protection. A majority of 61.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed. When asked whether a new regulator should be established dedicated solely to doctors, 82.2% supported the idea. Only 5.6% opposed it. Regulation of PAs and AAs Cited as a Major Issue The survey, conducted between 13 and 16 June, attracted 1539 BMA member responses. Professor Philip Banfield Highlighting the results on Monday at the association's annual representative meeting, chair of council Professor Philip Banfield said that a prominent source of dissatisfaction lay in the GMC's approach to regulating physician associates (PAs) and anaesthesia associates (AAs). Banfield said there is no national scope of practice or clear limits on what associates can do. The BMA had collected more than 600 'shocking examples' of unsafe practices by associates. These included the widespread prescribing of medicines, inappropriate referrals for ionising radiation, and cases of avoidable patient harm and death. "But in the face of mounting evidence, coroners' reports, and legal challenges, the NHS continues to bury its head in the sand and refuses to introduce the most rudimentary safety measures,' he said. In a scathing critique of the GMC's role as professional regulator, Banfield asked, 'Who the hell is charge?' In place of accountability, there is "just a dangerous game of pass the parcel where the music never stops', he told delegates. Banfield compared the blurring of lines between doctors and PAs to the failings of the Horizon IT system at the Post Office. He called for a public inquiry into the issue, with full statutory powers to hold those responsible to account. Joint Regulation Spurs Professional Boundary Concerns The BMA opposed the GMC becoming the joint statutory regulator for doctors and associates. This arrangement took effect in December 2024 despite opposition from many medical organisations. In April, the BMA lost a High Court challenge against the GMC's decision to issue a single set of professional standards for doctors and associates. The court ruled that the arrangement was 'logical and lawful'. The BMA branded it "irrational and misleading". The GMC duly updated its Fitness to Practise Rules to embrace doctors under the same standards as associates. Banfield told conference delegates that the result of joint regulation had been "incessant and unsafe blurring of professional boundaries that threaten the very foundations of practising medicine". BMA Calls for New Doctor-only Regulator The GMC has failed doctors and patients for too long, he said. The BMA is calling for a new independent regulator solely for doctors that is 'unburdened by the abject failure of what the GMC has become'. The new body must regain the profession's confidence, protect patients, treat doctors fairly, and place them at the heart of its decisions, he said. Banfield also urged the government to address doctor unemployment in the NHS 10-year plan. He highlighted ongoing issues with specialty bottlenecks causing resident doctor unemployment. This is "another debacle that the NHS and its paymasters have been aware of for years, but haven't lifted a finger to resolve, let alone taken any responsibility for", he said. GMC Response to Criticism A GMC spokesperson said: "We take our role working with doctors to support good, safe patient care very seriously. Our aim is to deliver effective, relevant and compassionate regulation.' The GMC welcomed the "much-needed" reform of the regulatory framework. "Making further changes to the way we work will continue to benefit patient safety and ensure the public has confidence in the doctors we regulate," the spokesperson added. Historical Criticisms of GMC's Performance Calls to replace the GMC as medical regulator are not new. A BMJ opinion article from November 2022 described it as " failing patients and doctors for 30 years ". Professor Aneez Esmail and Dr Sam Everington called the GMC a dysfunctional organisation that 'serves only itself". They criticised the GMC's handling of criticism as a ' performative masterclass ,' involving denial, citing lack of evidence, commissioning predictable research, and producing 'an endless series of reports so that it can wring its hands in false contrition and promise that change will come'. In a follow up opinion article Dr Kamran Abbasi, BMJ editor in chief, noted that despite repeated promises, past GMC leadership had failed to implement recommendations from multiple reviews and inquiries.
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Give doctors work phones to tackle burnout and abuse, medics say
All doctors should be given work phones to help tackle burnout and protect medics from abuse, according to members of the British Medical Association (BMA). It comes as one doctor described using six apps on her personal device to do her job 'safely', and revealed the trust she works at relies on WhatsApp to fill locum shifts. Currently, there is no national NHS England policy that requires trusts to provide work phones to doctors or other staff. Delegates at the BMA's annual representative meeting in Liverpool voted for the union to demand employer-funded mobile phones for all medical staff to carry out NHS or university work, while rejecting any expectation that medics should use personal devices for professional communication. Dr Latifa Patel, chairwoman of the BMA's representative body and workforce lead, said: 'Many workplaces offer devices for professional communication, and the NHS should be no different. 'Doctors often work across the hospital site and in the community, including home visits, and need to be contactable. 'In recent years, we have seen an increasing reliance on doctors' own personal mobile phones.' BMA members also called for 'robust' safeguards to protect doctors from inappropriate contact, including sexual harassment, while advocating for clear boundaries between work life and personal life to reduce burnout. Dr Patel added: 'Using a work device, like a mobile phone, can help to define boundaries between work and home life, and significantly reduce burnout – something we know many doctors experience, and which is undoubtedly contributing to them either reducing their hours or leaving the NHS altogether. 'We also know some doctors are impacted by inappropriate contact, such as abuse or sexual harassment, sometimes in the form of unwanted messages and communication outside of work. 'Removing the reliance on personal devices is an action employers can take to mitigate these risks. 'We invite the Government to work with us to see how these devices can be introduced in the NHS as part of efforts to improve doctor wellbeing.' Emma Andrews told delegates she uses six different apps on her personal phone to do her job 'safely and to do it well'. She spoke of one incident where a medical team would not have been able to locate a patient in an 'obscure' room without using WhatsApp, with locum shifts in her trust also filled using the app. 'Before medicine, I was a civil servant, and I was provided with a phone, a laptop, because I needed it to do my job. 'It also provided security to the departments I worked in, so that government business only happened on government devices. 'Albeit it's not unreasonable to expect an employer to provide the tools I need to do my job. 'We shouldn't be subsidising the NHS with our data, with our battery life or with our work-life balance.'
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Overlooking sexual harassment against health staff ‘risks patient safety'
Healthcare staff who 'turn a blind eye' to colleagues being sexually harassed at work face putting patient safety at risk, doctors have warned. Medics claim that overlooking these incidents allows other toxic behaviours 'to perpetuate'. It comes as members of the British Medical Association (BMA) called for NHS trusts to include active bystander training – which aims to equip people with the skills to challenge unacceptable conduct – in mandatory training programmes. Delegates at the union's annual representative meeting (ARM) in Liverpool also voted for the BMA to lobby for a national anonymous reporting system for victims of sexual harassment. Dr Helen Neary, co-chairwoman of the BMA consultants committee, said: 'People are bystanders at all levels, and a working culture that turns a blind eye to this behaviour is also a risk to patient safety, enabling other poor behaviours to perpetuate.' The motion urged NHS organisations to probe allegations of sexual misconduct using trained investigators external to the trust. Dr Neary added: 'No one should feel unsafe at work. Yet the appalling truth is that doctors, disproportionately women, are still subject to sexual harassment, abuse and assault in the workplace – often by their fellow doctors. This has to stop. 'Not only is it obviously completely unacceptable and has a devastating impact on victims, but also affects the quality of care and workforce capacity as poor behaviours will do nothing to retain staff in the NHS.' In March, the latest NHS staff survey found one in 12 (8.82%) of workers were the target of unwanted sexual behaviour such as offensive comments, touching and assaults. The proportion was similar to that reported in 2023 (8.79%) when the question was first asked as part of the survey. Last October, NHS England launched a new national sexual misconduct policy framework to ensure trusts had robust policies in place for staff to report incidents. Speaking to delegates at the BMA ARM in Liverpool, Professor Bhairavi Sapra said that while the framework is a 'very welcome first step', it is not mandatory. 'It is up to individual employers to adopt it, and even then, perpetrators can simply move on from one employer to another without accountability for those in positions of power to prevent this behaviour,' she added. 'Worse still, there is no national reporting mechanism. That means if someone wants to report an incident months later in a different workplace, they face an uphill battle, often alone. 'Survivors have told us why they don't come forward. They fear being told they're overreacting. 'They fear retaliation or reputational damage. They fear nothing will change, and sadly, they are not wrong. 'Investigations, when they do happen, are rarely trauma informed, often the process itself can feel like another form of harm.' Dr Neary said: 'As the trade union and professional association for all doctors in the UK – from those beginning their careers as medical students to retirement and beyond – the BMA welcomes the legal obligation placed on the NHS to protect employees from sexual harassment. 'This vote makes some excellent suggestions on how this work can go further, including anonymous reporting, that will encourage those concerned about coming forward to do so, and better equipping doctors on how they can support colleagues when they witness sexual harassment at work.' Prof Sapra also claimed the 'power imbalance' in the medical profession is 'stark', adding: 'Junior staff rely on senior medical staff for training, for references and for their very careers. 'That dependency makes them especially vulnerable and often silent.' An NHS England spokesperson said: 'It is totally unacceptable that NHS staff experience sexual misconduct or harassment at work – this behaviour has no place in the health service, and all organisations must take robust and compassionate action to prevent it. 'The NHS Sexual Safety Charter has been adopted by every Integrated Care Board and NHS Trust in England, which encourages consideration of external, independent investigators in complex or sensitive cases – and all NHS organisations should ensure that those leading these processes are properly trained to handle them with the seriousness and sensitivity they require.'
