AIBU to think the General Medical Council is not fit for purpose?

The MPTS is a separate body to the GMC.
It's really not the fault of the GMC that the MPTS decided the doctor's fitness to practice is not impaired enough to erase him.
Basically...the GMC is like the police...they investigate and gather evidence, then they have a team of doctors and lay people who consider the evidence and seriousness of the allegations and they decide the outcome...so think of them like the CPS.
If they believe the allegations are serious enough and there is enough supporting evidence they can refer the case to the MPTS....so think of the MPTS as the court and jury and judge.
When the case goes to the MPTS the GMC will engage a barrister to argue for the doctor to be suspended or erased....the doctors defence argues against. Just like a criminal court.
The MPTS "jury" is three people...they decide.

The MPTS is not the GMC...
Blame them...they make all these odd decisions like the suspension for laptop issue...
They erased the doctor who signed his initials into a liver ...
You can read most of their decisions on the website...you can even go and sit in on a hearing.

The GMC has a right to appeal the decision and push for a tougher sanction.
Believe me...most doctors don't want these kind of doctors working in the profession either

https://www.bma.org.uk/bma-media-centre/bma-takes-gmc-to-court-over-blurring-of-lines-between-doctors-and-physician-associates#:~:text=The%20BMA%20today%20begins%20its,between%20doctors%20and%20non%2Ddoctors

This is what the BMA think of the GMC regarding their deliberate misleading of the public

The BMA are taking legal case against them

The GMC isn't just failing in it's duty to the public, it is actively and deliberately misleading the public

Love to drill down on the GMC people. And their finances. There's a lot going on with them, none of it good.

BMA and GMC are completely separate organisations - BMA are the doctors union and the GMC is in charge of doctors registration. They are often at odds with each other. BMA is not responsible for enforcing doctors standards like the GMC should be.

Very odd decision by GMC, especially considering some of the cases where they do impose sanctions. I hope it is reviewed.

The NMC are much quicker to strike some of the register than GMC.

My comment are not bollocks. In the course of my career, I am come across at least 10 cases doctors whether involve in serious offence such as DV, sexual assault and they are still working. It disgusting. I don't want to work with such people. I certainly wouldn't want to be patient of someone who a DV perpetrator.

As a doctor of many years, I don’t have any faith in the GMC or BMA. The stuff that some of our male colleagues have got away with over the years is horrific.

A patient’s relative once reported me. She was clearly unwell as the stuff she wrote simply did not make sense. It took the GMC nine months to find somebody to look at my case. When they finally allocated somebody, it took them one day to read the complaint and close the case with no recommendations. Whilst I knew all along that I was ‘innocent’, it was still incredibly stressful.

Yet they have let male doctors who have committed serious sexual assaults continue working, and the GMC then commends them for their ‘cooperation and openness’. It makes me sick. Hospital trusts are often complicit.

The GMC is certainly not fit for practice but this is absolute bollocks. Referral to the GMC is commonly used as a threat against doctors and the suicide rate for doctors under investigation speaks for itself. I don’t know any doctors who feel confident in the GMC. It’s also been found by the courts to be institutionally racist. This case absolutely baffles me when you compare what doctors have been struck off/suspended for (using a family member’s travel card, trying to obtain a work laptop, whistleblowing etc). The GMC is also failing when it comes to the issue of physician’s associates.

It needs full scale reform and to be held accountable for its many, many failings.

There is potentially going to be private litigation which may impact on his ability to practise in future https://www.fletcherssolicitors.co.uk/medical-negligence/news/fletchers-solicitors-supporting-patients-affected-by-dr-ali-shokouh-amiri/

Absolute nonsense

There are some appalling cases of heavy handed action by the GMC and the trauma to doctors of being under investigation is enormous- not least because cases can drag on for years before the doctor is then found totally not guilty of any wrong doing. The numbers of Dr suicides for those under investigation is horrific.

The regulation of physician associates, medical misogyny, allowing erasure of past offences when changing gender on the record are all huge concerns. Most/many doctors don’t think the GMC is fit for purpose but are still obliged to pay a hearty annual fee to allow it to continue its existence.

I stand by my comments. Doctors get away with much more than other HCP. The GMC doesn't investigate most of their complaints.

That's a really incorrect amd ignorant statement to make about doctors.

The GMC should certainly be looked at, I agree that they are atrocious.

Look up GP, laptop and GMC and you'll find a doctor who was suspended for saying she was 'promised a laptop ' to do her job rather than that a laptop was to be 'considered'

The vast majority of doctors are hard working highly conscientious individuals who fear the GMC because they are complete loose canons like in the above case

Doctors think the GMC is completely misleading the public and not doing it's basic job by fake- regulating physician associates who have a basic superficial short training ( much shorter than a nurse) and the NHS would like you to think you've seen someone 'medical' when you haven't

Your statement about doctors is entirely wrong. Miles off, mate.

GMC record for this man.

WTAF?!?!? How is he allowed to carry on practicing? He should be in jail.

The GMC is not fit for practice. One thing I noticed about working for NHS is that most staff group have a bit of fear whereas doctors can be quite blasé about certain things. I think the it comes to down to the fact that nurses and allied professional know they will lose their registration if they cross the line where it appears doctor don't appear to care about complaints or bad practice.

This is absolutely hair-raising that such a person can be allowed to continue to practise on patients. if women cant be safeguarded properly while having medical treatment then the whole system has failed.

It looks like it’s the Professional standards authority for health and social care that oversees the other authorities. They seem to be reviewing how they themselves deal with sexual misconduct issues, which looks very necessary.

https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/news-and-updates/news/webinar-series-tackling-sexual-misconduct-healthcare-2025-dates

Is there any mechanism where we as potential patients can object to this decision?

I really think the GMC needs to be challenged (and possibly have their hard drives checked, I cannot understand how anyone with any decency can imagine that a doctor who sexually and physically assaults women patients is a suitable person to be a doctor).

Oh and if he decides he's got special laydee feelz and he's a woman, they'll give him a new registration number and no one will ever know that he's this man who assaulted women.

They are rotten to the core. Who are they? We need a journalist to have a look at every individual member of the GMC who made these decisions, because there's something not right about them.

Bloody Hell, that's an absolutely shocking series of offences, the sheer number is staggering. Why he wasn't struck off is baffling. As an earlier poster said, why has he not been reported to the Police? These are cases of assault and sexual assault.

What on Earth was the GMC panel thinking?

And apparently the Guernsey doctor is now working in Essex so if you’re local there make a note of his name and refuse to see him.

Yet another dr who branded his initials on patients livers was charged and found guilty of criminal charges and struck off. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-59954321

while I’m not saying what he did was acceptable it seems a lot less serious than removing overrides without consent (surely that’s assualt) and less serious than touching a clitoris…could it be that crimes against women aren’t taken seriously 🤔

There is a similar issue with nurses with history of sexual abuse being kept on the register because they have “reformed”. I don’t think this is a doctor v nurse thing, I think it’s a male practitioner v female practitioner thing.

Bugger. Sorry.

I wonder whether that is because they are the results of specific searches on his name in the register/tribunal decisions, and you have to search each time to find them.

in which case, here is the link for the latest MPTS decisions: https://www.mpts-uk.org/hearings-and-decisions/tribunal-hearings-and-decisions

and here is the link to search for someone on the GMC register: https://www.gmc-uk.org/registration-and-licensing/our-registers

Neither of these links work 🤔

Sorry, hadn’t read the full thread when I posted.

The GMC and the BMA. No wonder the NHS is so captured by gender woo crap.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/01/the-militant-bma-is-becoming-an-enemy-of-the-people/

I clicked on this thread, expecting it to be about the GMC listing ( you couldn't call it 'regulating') physician associates so that patients falsely believe they have seen a doctor when they've actually seen someone with a couple of years very superficial training, yet they can now say they are 'GMC medical professionals', deliberately adding to patients' confusion.

I am horrified at the above.

Am absolutely dumbfounded at this news article and wonder who the heck is on the GMC, why they are accountable to no one. The entire organisation should be disbanded. It no longer serves its original purpose of assisting patients identify who is a doctor, and is here promoting a criminal.