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

[Jacopo]

A doctor in Guernsey, Dr Ali Shokouh-Amiri, removed the ovaries of two women without consent. He was also accused of 100 counts of sexual misconduct against female patients, and found guilty of 24 of them.

He is now a consultant in a hospital in England, and the GMC have decided that he is fit to continue working there because he has reflected on his actions and is sorry.
Meanwhile his victims are described as having had their lives ruined, and are a shell of their former selves. One of those whose ovaries were removed without consent was 17 years old.

The sexual offences included touching a patient’s clitoris, hugging and kissing another patient on two occasions, and performing multiple intimate examinations without a chaperone present.

The Chief Executive of the health board in Guernsey says this doctor would not be allowed to practise there now if he applied for a job.

Last year The Independent found that almost 250 medics accused of rape and sexual assault had been allowed to continue practising. Wes Streeting was sufficiently concerned to have called a meeting with the chair of the GMC. Yet here we are again.

www.independent.co.uk/news/health/doctors-nurses-sexual-assault-b2589819.html

Full story here: www.itv.com/news/channel/2025-02-14/doctor-who-removed-ovaries-without-consent-ruled-fit-to-practise

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.

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

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.

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/

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

That is good news, I hope the patients win.

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