Reports > The Fifth Report > CHAPTER EIGHTEEN - The General Medical Council Conduct Procedures: Initial Stages Conducted by the Administrative Staff >
Introduction
|
18.1 |
I have already explained that the General Medical Council’s (GMC’s) old conduct procedures dealt with doctors who had been convicted of criminal offences and those who were alleged to have been guilty of serious professional misconduct (SPM). All complaints about a doctor’s conduct and all information that a doctor had been convicted of a criminal offence received by the GMC were considered first by members of the administrative staff. I have already explained in Chapter 15 that complaints made to the GMC underwent a series of filtering processes. As a result of those filtering processes, the vast majority of cases were closed without reaching the stage of a public hearing by the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC). |
|
18.2 |
The first of those filtering processes was conducted by the administrative staff, who applied various set criteria in order to determine whether a case should be closed at that initial stage or whether it should advance into the fitness to practise (FTP) procedures. In 2003, members of the administrative staff were responsible for closing 65% of the 3821 complaints about doctors’ conduct or performance which were received by the GMC in that year. In view of the fact that so many cases were closed at this early stage, as a result of decisions taken by the administrative staff, it was clearly important for the Inquiry to examine the processes undertaken by the staff and the criteria on which their decisions were based. |
|
18.3 |
In this Chapter, I shall describe briefly the processes undertaken by the administrative staff on receipt of a complaint or report about a doctor. I shall consider the circumstances in which members of staff were in the past permitted to close a case and the criteria which they were required to apply. I shall also look at the procedure for dealing with information about convictions. I shall examine the extent to which the decisions made by members of staff were subjected to audit. |
|
18.4 |
I shall then proceed to consider some specific issues arising from the processes undertaken by members of staff. In particular, I shall be considering the policy of the GMC, which was current for many years, of instructing its staff to advise complainants that they should pursue their concerns through local complaints procedures. I shall also consider whether there was any, or any adequate, follow-up of such cases by the GMC. I shall go on to consider whether complaints and reports to the GMC have in the past been properly investigated. I shall consider whether there has in the past been an adequate exchange of information between the GMC and the employers and primary care organisations (PCOs) of doctors in respect of whom complaints have been made. Finally, I shall examine some problems which have arisen in connection with decisions to close cases, by reference to some individual cases which have been dealt with by the staff. To enable me to do this, the Inquiry obtained and examined a small number of cases which had recently been closed by members of the administrative staff. The intention behind examining these cases was to gain some insight into how the processes described by the GMC worked in practice. |
Witnesses
|
|
18.5 |
The Inquiry heard oral evidence from Mr Alan Howes (who was employed by the GMC between 1977 and 2002 and was Head of the Conduct Section from 1987 to 1994), from Mr Antony Townsend (Deputy Head, later Head, of the Conduct Section from 1994 to 1998), Mr Finlay Scott (Chief Executive of the GMC since 1994) and Mr Neil Marshall (Head of the Screening Section since March 2002). Professor Sir Graeme Catto (current President of the GMC), Dr Krishna Korlipara (a member of the GMC since 1984 and a medical screener from 1998 until 2004) and Professor Isobel Allen (Emeritus Professor of Health and Social Policy, University of Westminster Policy Studies Institute (PSI)) also gave relevant evidence. |
The Screening Section
|
|
18.6 |
Information about convictions, together with all complaints and communications about doctors, were dealt with initially by the Screening Section. The exception was when the information or complaint clearly related to issues affecting the health of a doctor. Those cases were directed straight to the Health Section. The Inquiry was told that, as at December 2003, the staff of the Screening Section consisted of three casework managers, 29 caseworkers, 11 casework assistants and a secretary. A caseworker had the primary day-to-day responsibility for each case, with guidance from casework managers and administrative support from casework assistants. |
|
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN - The General Medical Council Conduct Procedures: Initial Stages Conducted by the Administrative Staff
