Rapid Responses to:

EDITORIALS: Richard Smith Should GMC leaders be put to the sword? BMJ 2000; 321: 61 [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

A Wise, but Ironic Editorial

Brian Keighley   (10 July 2000)

Should BMA leaders be put to the sword?

Jayantha Ilangaratne   (13 July 2000)

A Wise, but Ironic Editorial 10 July 2000
Brian Keighley, Elected GMC Member for Scotland/GP Principal Balfron, Stirlingshire Send response to journal: Re: A Wise, but Ironic Editorial	Sir, Your second editorial on the General Medical Council in recent weeks (8 July), while characteristically cogent and pointed, is ironic for various reasons. The first editorial on the subject (20 May) was influential in raising questions about the continuing existence of the organisation and of the supposed unpopularity of its President. It is therefore perhaps not surprising that the British Medical Association, at its Annual Representative Meeting, should carry a motion expressing “no confidence” in the GMC, albeit surrounded by qualifying amendments in order to soften its impact. It is reassuring that you now take the view that GMC leaders should not “be put to the sword” and that “doctors must work together”. It is a great pity that the problems the GMC faces in managing the media were not expressed in your original piece, let alone your tardy recognition that it has come into the firing line “probably unfairly”. You also correctly identified that most of the speakers against the “no confidence” motion were general practitioners. Given that hospital specialists and their junior colleagues are already exposed to institutional scrutiny of standards of practice, as opposed to a far less rigorous existence in general practice, it is even more ironic that most of the resistance to revalidation should come from the former group. The third irony is that the same ARM backed revalidation overwhelmingly, that the GMC is already moving towards a new structure and arrangements for governance and that as soon as the dreaded words “no” and “confidence” were uttered in the same sentence, peace has broken out. All the involved parties now seem anxious to have a dialogue in the name of the preservation of medicine as a profession. The British medical profession now needs a rallying point about which to restore its flagging morale and its loss of direction. Some may choose the latest attempt to reorganise the National Health Service, others will put their faith in their medical royal college or the BMA. I am a doctor because of registration with the GMC, not because of any contractual arrangement with the NHS, nor even because of member ship of a college or professional organisation. I, for one, will be happy to support a future for the GMC as a primary professional focal point if for no other reason than it is prepared to take a courageous stance for good medical practice in the face of so many sectional interests. Yours faithfully, Brian D Keighley Elected GMC Member for Scotland The Clinic, Buchanan Street, Balfron, Stirlingshire, G63 0TS
Should BMA leaders be put to the sword? 13 July 2000
Jayantha Ilangaratne, Doctor Send response to journal: Re: Should BMA leaders be put to the sword?	From its inception,the Council of the GMC were dominated by professional members,the doctors.Indeed,an overwhelming majority of Council members have been, and still are,members of the trade union BMA.Similarly,some of the Council members have been high ranking officials of the BMA,and a few still enjoy such positions within the BMA.Needless to say that some doctors through their 'privileged status'in the BMA,have canvassed themselves into the GMC's Council via the active publicity offered by the BMA-owned,BMJ.And now,the BMA have lost faith in the GMC!!.So if the GMC had been badly run,then it is the BMA's 'friends' within the GMC who are responsible for much of the failings of the GMC. So does the BMA think now that they have fooled the public by passing a vote of no confidence in the GMC?.Perhaps,the BMJ Editor should also ask - "could everything be solved if the BMA leadership resigned?".Of course,blaming leadership of the GMC is nothing new as the BMJ readers will know,and the biased publicity which the BMJ offers to some[1],at opportune moments.This editorial,yet again shows BMA's hypocrisy,and BMJ Editor's unfailing loyalty to its journal-owner,the BMA. REFERENCES [1] http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/318/7195/1373/a#EL1