The GMC Disability

One of the biggest problems with the GMC is that they have never found their role in life. I once read an excellent book written by George Bernard Shaw. The reference is as follows - Shaw G B. Doctors' delusions, crude criminology and sham education. London: Constable, 1932.

A excellent quote to remember is this

When asked "Have we lost faith?" George Bernard Shaw replied, "Certainly not; but we have transferred it from God to the General Medical Council

This entertaining jaunt of a book is worth a good read. History tells us much about the GMC. Bernard Shaw was not fond of the organisation and was the first of the rebels. I am sure had he lived, he would have joined us in solidarity. I like Shaw's work. He is insightful and some of his ideas about the GMC is still true. This shows us that the place has not progressed in 100 years. MJA summarises it

"Nearly 100 years ago, George Bernard Shaw, in the preface to his play The doctor’s dilemma, savagely attacked the medical profession for its direct personal and pecuniary interest in the treatment of patients and argued that doctors could not be trusted to act in their patients’ best interests.1 He observed that medicine was not driven by science but rather by patient demand and service. Nor was Shaw particularly impressed with medical science, noting that “medical science is as yet very imperfectly differentiated from common curemongering witchcraft”. In short, he argued that the medical practice of his time was mostly ineffectual and that doctors should advise patients that wellness is not attained through a bottle of medicine but through decent housing, clothes, food and clean air. The doctor’s dilemma was that providing this advice would jeopardise his already meagre income".

Another interesting piece was written by Richard Smith. This was before he became a pretend blogger with delusions of radicalism. Helen Bright quite rightly mocks the bloggers at the BMJ. They cannot quite get there in terms of radicalism or persona. In the article on the GMC by Smith, he tells us that the GMC feels misunderstood. Of course, it feels misunderstood. After years of media driven judgments, interference with the Bristol Inquiry verdicts [ yes, we know about those Donald Irivine] and cosmetic solutions, the GMC is possibly quite lost. One of its flaws is never being able to bow down and admit an error. One can review this in the leading definition of infamous conduct [ Allinson v GMC]. Allinson was struck off for suggesting that smoking was linked to bad health/cancer. Anyhow, following the Doll study, the GMC did not offer him a posthumous pardon. Anyhow, those of you who walk into ASDA as I do will note Allinson's bread and flour. I buy Allinson's bread and consume it just to remember how conceited the GMC really are.

Since Allinson, not very many good things can be said of the GMC. Apart from Mark Ellen in their Information Team, they have nothing going for them. All the cosmetics they engage in, isn't really worth much at all.Nevertheless, perhaps they require makeovers to start afresh.

Anyhow, on the subject of modern times, Prof Catto and I had discussed the issue of disability. I had raised the issue of Death by Indifference, a report by Mencap, with him. I suggested that a consult was required, with immediate alterations to the student curriculum as well. That was in 2007.

By 2010, the consult was agreed.   Catto felt we were pushing an open door. I am not so convinced. Without Catto's support, the idea would have fallen flat on its face.

This decision by the GMC amused me somewhat because firstly I am aware no one at the GMC or elsewhere would be ready to admit where the idea originated from and secondly, it is always fascinating that a organisation so disabled by its own failings is now planning on improving the care of disabled people. Well, I had to give them credit for trying. I am not of course convinced by the GMC's sentiments. I am rather cynical and believe the GMC do require some good publicity after being thrown around by the public like a useless piece of meat. What better way to achieve this than imply that they support disabled people. Then perhaps I should stop being so cynical. It may be a habit really since Sushant Varma and I changed the face of ethnicity statistics at the GMC for good.Now doctors will be able to establish discrimination via statistics. In the past, no stats were available hence no doctor could establish discrimination.

A colleague quite rightly pointed out - when is the GMC going to implement their equality scheme on the disproportionate number of foreign graduates who are struck off. When do they plan on addressing the issue of racism in the NHS. Afterall, in 2008, Liam Donaldson accepted that racism does exist. Having agreed that it does exist, it is rather an irony that the misconduct test used in his case in the R v GMC Ex Parte Remedy UK was more lenient than that used with minority doctors. He wasn't complaining at this point :). 

So in conclusion, there are many things the GMC could improve on. They did though pick the subject with the most sympathy factor attached to it. Then that is Niall Dickson for you - he is an ex journalist after all. Whatever their motive, I have to accept that the move to address the issues affecting disabled people is a constructive one and perhaps it will improve healthcare in the future. Perhaps during the consult, the GMC can learn more about its own disabilities - it should understand that despite its disabilities and faults, it is an organisation capable of great things. All they have to do is try.