Doctors’ regulatory reform must be a priority, says MDU
Reform of the GMC’s fitness-to-practise processes are top of a list of Medical Defence Union (MDU) priorities for the Government.
The union’s An Agenda For Change report, published to coincide with the Labour party conference, calls for a reform of doctors’ regulation to tackle the massive costs of clinical negligence claims and to do more to protect doctors’ health and well-being.
These are among the areas doctors have told the defence body they want the Government to prioritise.
MDU director of professional services Dr Caroline Fryar described the emotional strain put on doctors undergoing GMC investigations as ‘enormous’.
Cases took too long to process and often impacted on the doctors’ ability to provide much-needed care for patients, she said.
‘The most recent Professional Standards Authority (PSA) report shows that it takes an average of 102 weeks or nearly two years for the GMC to progress fitness-to-practise referrals from receipt to final hearing, which is way too long.’
Dr Fryar added: ‘Undergoing a GMC investigation is one of the most difficult experiences of our members’ professional lives. The stress of being under scrutiny during a lengthy and potentially career-ending fitness-to-practise process can have a devastating impact. Fitness-to-practise procedures are too rigid, take too long and are governed by outdated legislation.
‘The Government must prioritise legislative reform to allow the GMC to adopt a more proportionate approach to regulation, to the benefit of both patients and doctors.
‘Doctors have waited a long time for this and, meanwhile, physician and anaesthesia associates, who will be regulated by the GMC later this year, will benefit from a new structure. This is unfair and needs addressing urgently.’
The MDU’s An Agenda for Change report calls for:
- Reform of healthcare professional regulation. Bring forward a Section 60 Order to enable doctors to get the reformed, fairer, more timely and more proportionate model of regulation they have long promised.
- Action on clinical negligence costs. Repeal Section 2(4) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948, which will allow courts to factor in the existence of the NHS when determining compensation. And tackle disproportionate legal costs by ensuring fixed recoverable costs in lower-value clinical negligence claims is promptly enacted.
- Supporting the health and well-being of the workforce. Direct NHS employers to ensure that staff catering and rest facilities are provided, including for those working out of hours.
- Commitment to continued funding for programmes like NHS Practitioner Health, which can ensure support for doctors when they feel at risk of, or experience, burnout.
And some good news…
The personal injury discount rate (PIDR) in Scotland and Northern Ireland is to be increased, potentially saving millions of pounds in the costs of compensation payments.
Following a review, the Government Actuary has determined that the PIDR in Northern Ireland and Scotland should be increased to +0.5% from the previous rates of -1.5% and -0.75% respectively.
The PIDR is used to calculate personal injury awards for future losses such as care and loss of earnings: the lower the rate set, the higher the cost of compensation.
MDU head of claims, David Pranklin, said: ‘In recent years, reductions in the PIDR have led to a huge increase in the cost of clinical negligence claims. This has had serious implications for the NHS and for MDU members, who have been shouldered with the increased costs.
‘So, the determination by the Government actuary to increase the rate in Scotland and Northern Ireland to +0.5% is welcome news. This will mean that more money can be retained in the NHS to be spent on patient care.
‘The process of reviewing the PIDR in England and Wales is underway and is due to be completed by January 2025. We hope the England and Wales PIDR will be increased from the current rate of -0.25%.’
- See ‘MDU urges Government to prioritise action on negligence costs ’
- See ‘The fight to lower indemnity costs’