Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Professional bodies say that they regulate fitness to practice to ensure public trust, protect the public interest, to ensure life-long competence and to improve healthcare outcomes. [ 2 ] : 5 Authors who write on the topics are often interested in the quality of care, patient safety , and risk of medical errors , and more generally the social ...
The GMC has powers to issue advice or warnings to doctors, accept undertakings from them, or refer them to a fitness-to-practise panel. The GMC's fitness-to-practise panels can accept undertakings from a doctor, issue warnings, impose conditions on a doctor's practice, suspend a doctor, or remove them from the medical register (when they are ...
Before any sanction is considered the GMC or MPTS must first be satisfied that a doctor's fitness to practise is currently impaired. If there is no impairment then a tribunal cannot impose a sanction, though they can and should consider whether a Warning should be issued where a doctor significantly departs from Good Medical Practice. [45]
The Medical Act 1978 (c. 12), which followed the Merrison Report [5] made the GMC more accountable, extended its functions particularly in relation to medical education, and separated the disciplinary processes from those that deal with doctors whose performance is impaired by ill-health. The provisions of the 1978 Act were consolidated into ...
GMC Fitness to Practice Panel finding of serious professional misconduct against Meadow, July 2005. Judgement in High Court appeal in case brought by Meadow against GMC finding of serious professional misconduct, Feb 2006. Court of Appeal judgement restoring the ability of the GMC to discipline misconduct by expert witnesses, Oct 2006.
An expanding coalition of health and consumer advocates is campaigning against Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s nomination to the top U.S. health job over concerns about his activism against vaccines and ...
In June 2006 the GMC confirmed that they would hold a disciplinary hearing of Wakefield. The GMC's Fitness to Practise Panel first met on 16 July 2007 [62] to consider the cases of Wakefield, Professor John Angus Walker-Smith, and Professor Simon Harry Murch. [63] All faced charges of serious professional misconduct.
Summing up the Act, the British Medical Journal wrote, "In future, the GMC will be possessed of wider powers, improved machinery, and a better status, all serving to ensure the continued and enhanced confidence of the profession and the public alike." [4]