You put it to me? There's nothing comfortable about either option. And they're not mutually exclusive. The 'system' does need fixing, but mustn't be allowed to become the sole focus of blame just because it conveniently avoids individual accountability.https://twitter.com/c7rky/status/1053582542694244352?s=21 …
Don't think that last part was helped by timing of the uproar. There was barely a peep until GMC appealed the erasure. Allowed for the impression that threat to career held greater significance than a serious criminal conviction for many. Way before calls for GNM reform emerged.
-
-
GMC appealed 12 month suspension by tribunal, cos they wanted her struck off for life. It was the severity of GMC response that caused uproar. But since lifetime striking off is normally appropriate for clinical negligence manslaughter, people looked again at the jury verdict.
-
The severity, in the context of inconsistent and perceived excessive applications of the new legal powers given to the GMC (but not other regulatory bodies) to challenge its own FTP panel’s decisions, which had already been flagged as a concernhttp://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/regulation/gmc-set-for-double-jeopardy-powers-to-overrule-tribunal-decisions/20002116.article#comments …
-
And read the comments to get an idea about the fears and feelings created...http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/your-practice/regulation/gps-face-double-jeopardy-under-new-gmc-power-to-appeal-tribunal-decisions/20030831.article …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.