Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;330:103-104 (15 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7483.103
Acquittal by the GMC is not necessarily an end to a doctor's case
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The General Medical Council has recently come under serious scrutiny, especially after the publication of the report by Dame Janet Smith (see BMJ 1 Jan 2005, p 10). Among its many duties, the GMC also decides if a doctor is guilty of serious professional misconduct. However, acquittal by the GMC does not mean that the case cannot be referred to the High Court. In October 2004, the Court of Appeal ruled that a doctor who had been cleared of serious professional misconduct by the GMC could still be referred to the High Court by the regulatory watchdog, the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence (CHRE). In one fell swoop, professional regulation has been radically and disturbingly transformed. Doctors now stand in double jeopardy.
Disciplinary tribunals against doctors (and other healthcare professionals) share commonalities with criminal law in terms of the required standard of proof (beyond reasonable doubt), and the
Ash Samanta, consultant rheumatologist
University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester LE1 5WW (ash.samanta@uhl-tr.nhs.uk)
Jo Samanta, lecturer in law
De Montfort University, Leicester LE1 9BH
Read all Rapid Responses