Competence, professional self regulation, and the public interest

BMJ 1998;316:1740-1742 ( 6 June )

Education and debate

Competence, professional self regulation, and the public interest

Editorial by TreasureNews by Dyer

Rudolf Klein, professor of social policy.

Centre for the Analysis of Social Policy, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY

R.E.Klein@bath.ac.uk

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The case of the three doctors in Bristol represents a landmark in the history of the self regulation of the medical professionin the United Kingdom in terms of its length, its salience inthe eyes of the public, and the issues it has raised. It has stretchedover eight months and involved more than 60 days of hearings beforethe General Medical Council $---$ probably the most extended and expensivecase in the history of the GMC. It is the stuff of which headlinesare made; it is highly charged emotionally since it concerns thedeaths of children after heart operations. And it has provideda test case for the GMC's policy of seeking to ensure that allmembers of the profession accept their collective responsibilityfor maintaining standards and practising within the limits oftheir competence.¹

Until the GMC has determined its verdict, in the light of their findings of . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Articles

The aftermath of the Bristol case: James A R Willis, Brian McKinstry, P J Tomlin, Rachael Dawson, Alison J Gray, Roger Hole, Jim Egan, Douglas Lee, Peter Fisher, Rosemary J Geller, Katharine Gardiner, Patrick J Pemberton, Jim Ramsay, Dennis Briley, Richard Nicholson, Anjan K Banerjee, Beverley Webb, N Gainsborough, Susan Kerrison, R H Lloyd-Mostyn, Michael Ashley-Miller, Glyn J Elwyn, and Malcolm Lewis
BMJ 1998 317: 811. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The dark side of medicine
BMJ 1998 316: 0. [Full Text]

Lessons from the Bristol case: Tom Treasure
BMJ 1998 316: 1685-1686. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Compensation claims expected to follow GMC's findings: Clare Dyer
BMJ 1998 316: 1691. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

Tyrer, S., Oyebode, F. (2004). Why does the MRCPsych examination need to change?. Br. J. Psychiatry 184: 197-199 [Full text]
Price, C. P. (2000). Evidence-based Laboratory Medicine: Supporting Decision-Making. Clin. Chem. 46: 1041-1050 [Abstract] [Full text]
Paul, C. (2000). Internal and external morality of medicine: lessons from New Zealand. BMJ 320: 499-503 [Full text]
Harrison, S., Ahmad, W. I.U. (2000). Medical Autonomy and the UK State 1975 to 2025. Sociology 34: 129-146 [Abstract]
Willis, J. A R, McKinstry, B., Tomlin, P J, Dawson, R., Gray, A. J, Hole, R., Egan, J., Lee, D., Fisher, P., Geller, R. J, Gardiner, K., Pemberton, P. J, Ramsay, J., Briley, D., Nicholson, R., Banerjee, A. K, Webb, B., Gainsborough, N, Kerrison, S., Lloyd-Mostyn, R H, Ashley-Miller, M., Elwyn, G. J, Lewis, M. (1998). The aftermath of the Bristol case. BMJ 317: 811-811 [Full text]