Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles.
I'm often concerned at the hefty sanctions the GMC has historically meted out on junior doctors. I'm sure we are not getting the entire story here. The GMC is hardly the beacon of truth. It would be interesting to see what the doctor had to say.
This looks to me as a case where the junior doctor has been hung out to dry. There was no engagement probably due to the conceited manner the GMC often handles these cases.
In an era of Covid when there is a shortage of manpower, the GMC should have taken a more understanding approach. Her sanction should have been considerably less. Doctors who end patients lives aren't given this draconian sanction. It is notable that this doctor is from the ethnic minority and as we know the GMC seeks to sanction them more severely than Caucasian doctors.
It's probably time the GMC set up a better system of support for junior doctors. We saw them as the dementors and they can probably be worse having driven many a good doctor to the edge of suicide. Then I suspect the GMC and it's machinery doesn't have the maturity or the insight to correct their flaws in managing junior doctors property.
Dr Rita Pal
Past successful litigation against the GMC notably Pal v GMC. Done as a junior doctor.