The GMC has been criticised by a counter fraud group for allowing doctors to opt for ‘voluntary erasure’ from the register instead of facing charges for misconduct.
The Health Insurance Counter Fraud Group has questioned the GMC’s ability to effectively regulate the profession following the decision to allow Mr Owen Gilmore to retire without hearing charges against him.
The GMC was due to commence a fitness to practise hearing into the conduct of Gilmore, of the London Breast Clinic, this week. The allegations against him included the removal of breast tissue which was not clinically indicated or in the patients’ best interests; failure to maintain full medical records and obtain appropriate patient consent; and, sending incorrectly coded invoices to insurance companies, which was financially motivated and dishonest.
Group chair Dr Simon Peck said: “I am appalled by this decision. The charges in this case are very serious indeed. The GMC has let down the public…but worst of all it has let down numerous women who now will never know if they had unnecessary operations on their breasts and it effectively denies them justice if they did. These women have a right to know the truth.
“Allowing voluntary erasure prohibits these patients from understanding the concerns that have been raised against Mr Gilmore. The public put a great deal of trust in the medical profession and they need to be confident that the treatment that they receive is best medical practice and above all, necessary and appropriate for their condition.”
The GMC were similarly criticised earlier this year when Mr Nigel Sacks, a former consultant at the Royal Marsden, was allowed to voluntarily erase his name from the register. He faced 19 allegations of fraud and destroying accounting records relating to alleged false claims. He was allowed to voluntarily retire from the UK register without the case being heard, on the grounds of his health, despite continuing to practise as a surgeon in Australia.
In contrast, Dr Sabah Al-Zayyat, who is accused of failing to spot signs that Baby P was being abused, has been refused voluntary erasure from the register on health grounds. She is seeking to overturn the GMC ruling and has won the right to legally challenge it in the High Court.
A spokesperson for the GMC said: “Each application for voluntary erasure is considered on its merits and, in the full knowledge of any outstanding fitness to practise concerns, an application can be turned down and outstanding issues dealt with at a public hearing.
“Our primary role is to ensure that those doctors on the medical register are fit to practise, however in dealing with concerns our process must be fair to the doctor concerned. An important issue to consider when looking at applications for voluntary erasure is whether the doctor is able to have a fair hearing.”
The London Breast Clinic declined to comment.
Tags: GMC
I am currently suffering the same injustice by the PCT and the GMC where the PCT have already accepted the GPs voluntary erasure and the GMC are considering it despite the fact that I complained about the GP many months ago and the investigation is in progress by the GMC.
My complaint was about the GPs’ incompetence and failure of duty towards my father which resulted in his death and a lot of heartache for the family. I am astonished that the GP can be offered a loophole and a way out to hide their mistakes and not face justice. I have received no answer as to why this is being allowed except the maximum that GMC can do anyway is to erase the GP so why waste resources to investigate!
The GMC fail to understand that unless the mistakes are investigated, identified and addressed accordingly, they will continue to happen elsewhere by another GP. I am not sure to whom I can complain about the GMC so they do not accept the GPs voluntary erasure. I have no faith left in the medical system which has failed my father and now us. No wonder people do not bother complaining as they know the outcome would be in the GPs’ favour anyway.