Protection Societies Decry GDC Changes

Protection Societies Decry GDC Changes

Cautious welcome or expression of concern? Three long established indemnity organisations have expressed differently expressed but in many ways consistent views on the latest changes to the GDC‘s Fitness to Practice process.

Eased out on their website, the GDC have announced that their move to holding dental professional hearings online is to be made permanent. This follows a GDC consultation exercise.

The move to remote hearings is something of a fait accompli since 87% of the 508 substantive hearings held between January 2022 and May 2024 were conducted remotely.  

The policy will take effect from 1 April 2025.

Stefan Czerniawski, Executive Director of Strategy at the GDC, emphasised the, significant cost savings. He claimed improved accessibility for participants, and that they had, “demonstrated reduced stress.” He did not say whether this applied to registrants as well as the other participants. 

He added that “Dental professionals retain the right to request in-person hearings and the GDC will normally agree with any requests made.” There will be new guidance for panellists which is being prepared.

The consultation on the format of hearings, conducted between November 2023 and February 2024, found that most respondents agreed that remote hearings were effective. 

During the period from January 2022 and the end of May 2024 there were 508 substantive hearings held, and of these 443 were remote, and 65 in-person or hybrid. Consensus on the format could not be reached in 25 cases, and of these, five registrant applications were rejected.   

Under the new policy, dental professionals will retain the right to request an in-person hearing for any reason, which will be granted in most cases. The GDC also maintain the right to request in-person proceedings where appropriate. Where there is no consensus between parties, an independent panel will provide direction through a preliminary meeting.   

Despite the change, all hearings will continue to be held in public unless there are specific reasons for private proceedings.  

The Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS) have now commented, and said that it was “pleased” that the GDC would continue to allow in person hearings.

MDDUS had earlier voiced its concerns about the changes and claimed that many GDC registrants continue to request in-person hearings.

Commenting on the GDC decision, Dr Rachael Bell, head of dental at MDDUS, said: “We’re pleased to see that the option of a hearing in-person remains, as by no means all cases will be appropriate for remote hearings.

“We welcome the GDC’s commitment to monitoring the impact on all parties and the outcomes for both in-person and remote hearings. We expect in person hearings to be granted where sought and we look forward to seeing the amended guidance to panel members and chairs.”

The Dental Defence Union view was that it was: “disappointed GDC has decided not to retain in-person hearings.” During the consultation the DDU had made strong representations to the GDC to explain that such a move could disadvantage certain dental professionals undergoing a fitness to practise investigation.

John Makin, head of the DDU, said: “We are disappointed by the GDC’s decision. While we don’t dispute that in many instances, a remote hearing is preferable for all parties, we believe it is wrong for it to be a default position. Dental professionals are already under considerable pressure when responding to allegations being made and to first have to make a case for an in-person hearing, will add to their distress.” He added, “We will hold the GDC to their promise that such requests will be granted in most cases.” 

The statement from Dental Protection was equally blunt, and headed, “Decision to make remote hearings permanent is a setback.” During the consultation Dental Protection had urged the GDC to safeguard the option for dental professionals to choose in-person hearings in the interests of fairness and justice.

Raj Rattan, Dental Director at Dental Protection said: “The effectiveness of virtual hearings compared to in-person hearings is nuanced and influenced by numerous psychological factors. Although virtual hearings offer convenience, they lack the nonverbal depth essential for accurately evaluating attributes such as credibility and sincerity.

“However, we will support our members including those who are neurodivergent or struggle with mental health to apply for, and benefit from an in-person hearing where they have access to a support network.”

These three defence organisations have vast experience of the GDC. The GDC have said that they will consider requests for in-person hearings. It is difficult not to interpret the reactions from the indemnifiers as revealing a fundamental lack of trust in the regulator.


You need to be logged in to leave comments.
0
0
0
s2sdefault

Please do not re-register if you have forgotten your details,
follow the links above to recover your password &/or username.
If you cannot access your email account, please contact us.

Mastodon Mastodon