Node: GDC - Not fit for purpose?

GDC fit for purpose or box tickers?

29.08.14 : GDC - Not fit for purpose?

Not the first time that I have said this! As a fellow dental professional I am quite sure that you haven't missed the huge hike in the ARF that the GDC are proposing.

The proposed hike of 64% to £945 for dentists is just a joke. The GDC is 'justifying' this massive increase as a result of the increase in number of and cost of Fitness to Practise cases since 2010. Are they saying, “It’s all your fault for being unfit to practise and costing us more money.”?? (Which also ignores the fact that the GDC is still failing in a number of important areas in its annual performance review by its regulator, the Professional Standards Authority (PSA))?

William Moyes responded to concerns by saying that, “... the more effective form of local resolution is by dentists and DCPs within their practices or work settings. Some complaints end up as fitness to practise cases because dissatisfied patients are not offered an opportunity to make their complaint and have it resolved quickly within the practice. We estimate that one in seven dentists or DCPs is subject to some form of official complaint at any given time – to the GDC, to the DCS, to the CQC (Care Quality Commission) or to NHS England.

As a dental profession, you have a very big contribution to make in ensuring complaints do not escalate unnecessarily. So I would ask you please to consider carefully if your patients are clear about how they can raise concerns with you or your colleagues, with confidence that they will be considered carefully and resolved fairly.”

I am already on the record (Dentistry 2013 - November 21st edition) as saying that there are a huge number of 'non-jobs' kicking around the GDC. Lines of faceless bureaucrats and administrators who have to justify their existence. A very expensive office on Wimpole Street.  Jobs for the boys.

It is time for a root and branch review into the GDC and what they do for both the dental profession and the general public. I suggest that an independent inquiry needs to consider:

  • Can one body effectively regulate what is an ever more diverse profession and protect the general public?
  • Does the GDC pay the market rate for its legal services?
  • Are too many cases making it to Ft?
  • Should the GDC have a remit to promote a positive view of UK dentistry?
  • Is an expensive office on Wimpole Street the best location for such a regulator?

I hope that this blog can add to the debate and dentistry as a profession can push for real change and not just jump up and down only for December to come around again and the status quo to continue.  

The Precise Art Of Technical Dentistry