General Medical Council レビュー 

I gave this so called standard setters and regulator of doctors, 1 star because it is not possible to go give them 0?
I presented concerns about a Sheffield urologist who removed my prostate and 10 months after the operation he informed during a clinic that he had not fully read the histology report. He went on to say that he had recently read the report, 10 months after the report was available to him and that it showed that the cancer had broken out of the prostate gland and had spread to the lymph nodes.
GMC response. No case to answer. They are literally a joke. I will not be the first person he has done this to and now because the GMC put doctors reputation before the interests of the patient, I will not be the last.
He has literally presented me with a death sentence. Metaphorically he has placed the rope around my neck and the GMC have opened the trap door. His actions were in breach of his duty of care and negligent, although I have been informed this is difficult to prove. The GMC’s actions are criminal. They are leaving future patients in the care of a surgeon who hasn’t any respect for his patients.

A horrendous experience that lasted 15 months. I first approached the gmc after my father had terrible care from two specialists who thanks to their poor judgement, facilitated his early death. The back and forth went on for months and they ruled while mistakes were made, the doctors were fit for practice. I triggered an appeal and meanwhile approached ISCAS who were far more helpful and as an aside, ruled in my family’s favour. Six months later we were still waiting for the gmc appeal results which eventually came back with the same ruling. Strange how two medical ombudsmen had different responses. Don’t bother, what a waste of time and additional emotional upheaval. Clearly biased.

A truly appalling experience.
You email them and never get responses.
You email them to ask for progress and still get no responses
The communication is totally a nightmare & they will always take the side of the NHS.
This organisation is not their for the complainant, it is there to protect the NHS.

Do not waste your time

Made a complaint about a GP who lied, have proof of the lies because it's in the medical records. Have proof that he put special catering sensitive data about an adult in a child's medical records. GMC did absolutely nothing, they are completely useless.

A completely racist and misogynistic organisation. Their racist bias is a contradiction to the values they should hold, and places patients at risk. They frequently suspend anyone speaking out on genocide, but pro-genocide doctors or those accused of sexual abuse related crimes are protected.

Two complaints were made about a doctor, who is employed by a local council (RBC) as a medical referee at a crematorium operated by RBC; 1)The Doctor (DrX) refused to allow RBC to disclose his identity (ID) until I (the appellant) took court action (App.A); and 2) DrX misled RBC by falsely claiming that a cremation was lawful.

GMC agreed with the Court that ID should have been provided but dismissed breach of this principle as an “isolated incident”. Consequently, GMC failed to investigate whether cover-up was a possible motive for DrX refusing to provide his ID, i.e. DrX attempting to avoid culpability for misleading RBC and for concealing unlawful cremation.

I asked DrX and RBC to state the disease[s], condition[s] or injury[s] that led to death. They refused, so I requested that GMC ask DrX, i.e. to confirm compliance with cremation law and to substantiate DrX’s statement to RBC. GMC stated they could not request this information from DrX because it is not within their remit. Part of GMC remit is to maintain public confidence in the profession and to promote and maintain proper standards and conduct. Therefore, GMC do have a duty and a remit to investigate when a complaint is made about a doctor’s competence and honesty. The duty and remit is stated in law (App.B). Medical referees are required by law to ascertain the requested information before authorising cremation. GMC dismissed my complaint because I had not clearly shown that DrX’s “ability to practise is compromised, or that he poses a current and ongoing risk to public protection”. GMC evaded their duty and passed the buck back to RBC to provide the information. The requested information is not on the cremation forms.

Medical referees should act in the public interest. They were introduced, as a safeguard, after Harold Shipman concealed his murders by registering deaths as “Old age”. The only cause of death on the cremation form in this case was “Old age”. Prior to death, many tests and CT scans were done at a NHS hospital. There was no diagnosis of any terminal disease or condition. The patient was then transferred from that hospital to a hospice and purportedly died there of “Old age”. However, medical records indicate mistreatment, which could be a motive for registering the death as “Old age”, i.e. a cover-up.

I conclude that GMC are not fit for purpose because they failed to meet their remit to “investigate where there are concerns that patient safety, or the public’s confidence in doctors, may be at risk” (quote from GMC website). Cover-ups will persist until GMC investigate holistically and take their remit seriously by exercising the functions assigned to them in accordance with the Medical Act 1983.

GMC Chief Executive will be provided with copy of this review and be asked to respond on Trustpilot.
~~~~~~
AppendixA extracts from Tribunal Court (DrX and RBC claimed my interest was only personal):
Paragraph 22: “We conclude that the doctor occupies a senior role for RBC which, whilst it may not be public facing, carries with it significant responsibility and that there is a public interest in transparency and accountability in relation to that role. We disagree that the Appellant’s interest was personal only. We therefore find that the Appellant had a legitimate interest in the requested information.”
Paragraph 23: “We also find that it was necessary to disclose the requested information for the purposes of enabling the Appellant’s complaint to the GMC. We accept the Appellant’s evidence in this regard. We have concluded that these factors should outweigh the doctor’s data protection rights in these circumstances.”

For full case details search Google for [2023] UKFTT 843 (GRC)

AppendixB
Paraphrasing The Medical Act 1983: the objective of the GMC in exercising their functions is the protection of the public in pursuit of the following objectives to:
(a)protect, promote and maintain the health, safety and well-being of the public,
(b)promote and maintain public confidence in the medical profession, and
(c)promote and maintain proper professional standards and conduct for members of that profession.

Dr Staveley is yet to have his license revoked despite his absurd and inhumane comments regarding the murder of innocent Palestinian children when he said quote on quote that he had “not killed enough” and GMC have taken no action since - a spineless and corrupt organization - i would never use their facilities and urge everyone else to do the same.

Complained about 2 consultant who gaslit me telling the. Pain was all in my head. Even one wanted ti show me a dead body she admitted killing by prescribing prednisone.
Gmc ignored my complaints. Gave no explanation. O safe guarding for any vulnerable patients in their care.
I later found I have critical Ulcerative colitis. And need that medication now. Joing pain is a given. This was 3rd hospital who found what they couldn't. I feel forvanyone in their care. Not trust GMC to protect any critical patients.

A disgusting Council who sack doctors for honesty and speaking out whilst trying to do their best for their patients. Doctors with integrity are 'cancelled' so that the GMC can pursue their ignorance just for the cash. Shame on you. After WW2 many collaborating medics stood trial and I sincerely hope many more do in the future. What science shames those telling the truth and rewards the liars and those who killed the old, sick and vulnerabble.

SACK THE LEADERSHIP.

Leadership need to be sacked for its treatment of Dr Ghassan Abu Sitta. Pursuing an appeal against a clear ruling that found him not guilty of misconduct is is deeply troubling and raises serious questions about judgement, priorities, and fairness. The whole debacle reeks of corruption and bias.

This decision has undermined the public’s confidence in the GMC’s ability to act as an impartial and balanced regulator. Rather than upholding trust in the profession, it gives the impression of an organisation more concerned with doubling down than admitting when it has overreached. That is not the mark of strong leadership; it is the mark of an institution out of touch with reality, morality, and both the medical community and the public it serves.

Hang your heads in shame and try and find a backbone. But most importantly… quit.

One star because you don't allow a zero score. The GMC are terrible and disgusting just like the nhs and their complaints procedures. You know that if you complain about the nhs, you will be fobbed off and told that if you don't like it take it to PHSO. Where you will be dismissed again. Everyone who has had cause to complain about the nhs knows this
I have had so much hostility and abuse for 14 years, I complain and then get told to refer to the PHSO. And that's the end of the line. As it is doctors mainly that has been the cause of my mistreatment I thought that I would take my complaints to the General Medical Council. I thought that I would be listened to and some actions would happen. Yeah, this was just my ignorance. The GMC are just the same as the PHSO. They will do whatever they can to get you to stop your complaint. I've had terrible treatment by doctors since I made a complaint about a female doctor in 2012. Every female, bar one has been blatantly hostile and abusive to me since.
I reported this to GMC. I told them the name of the doctor and their GMC registration number. That's all you need. Month after month they kept telling me that they couldn't identify the doctors. Name and GMC registration number is UNIQUE. There can be no mix up. Name and number is unique to that person. This is them trying to put you off. Time and again I repeatedly gave name and numbers. They then said they wanted name number place of work and what they specialise in to be able to identify the doctors. And absolute joke when all you need is name and GMC registration number. That's it. I eventually humoured them and gave them name number place of work and their speciality. I thought great I'll get some justice now. Nah. They just dismissed my case about identity of doctors when it was impossible not to be able to identify the doctors. It's the exact same as the PHSO. You will not get anywhere. You will have your complaint dismissed. This is how the system operates. You have no chance. Something has to happen to change the status quo. It's not acceptable. Don't bother with the GMC. Waste of time and energy.

Useless good for nothing organisation that should be abolished.

Totally corrupt organisation, follows the money and promotes whatever agenda the government tells it to promote, however damaging to patients.Any Doctor Who dares to whistle blow is struck off. As the saying goes, a cured patient is a lost customer! Shocking organisation. 😡

Obviously corrupt. Totally risk adverse and does anything the pharmaceutical industry tells it to do

Awful organisation which protects criminal Drs and pushes dangerous agendas whilst criminalizing Drs who dare whistleblow against harmful vaccines. They slander such Drs and accuse them of mistruths without any evidence.

Unbelievable how this organisation is allowed to operate in such a substandard manner

The GMC is a self serving registered charity. A doctors' club, existing systematically to reject investigation and censure of the fee paying members on which it relies. Masters, in the dark arts of spin, gaslighting and denial. And the whiter, more middle class and 'establishment' you are, the safer you will probably be, under its unmerited protection. It is aloof, patronising and uncaring, turning a deaf ear to mistreatment of the public. It is there to refute their grievances, giving credence to input from other authorities and regulators alone – their, together, forming a closed shop, against us, from which there is almost no escape ('PHSO / police / employer have no concerns, why should we?'). A medic's weasel words will always be accepted over yours, there is a totally uneven playing field – the way they like it. This bias is a travesty of how things should be. The GMC must go!

In my own case, it has totally blanked, airbrushed out of all existence, a 15 K strong petition – and reduced 325 supporters' active messages of discontent left for them to one mention – of 'local correspondence'!

My dad's GP surgery gave my 78-year-old dad child-dose antibiotics for a serious UTI, and the GP surgery denied him two home visits, would not give him adult doses of medication, and the practice manager has ignored my official complaint. It has been two months now since my complaint, and there has been nothing. My dad was rushed to the hospital with suspected Sepsis. I contacted the GMC, the CQC, the Essex Integrated Care Board, and they all said the same thing, they're not interested. So, there are really bad GP surgeries putting people's lives at risk and they're not interested.

The GMC are part of the healthcare system of unaccountability. In a system of unaccountability, you will always have more abusers and abuse by default.

I literally have recorded evidence of doctors telling medical lies to have me misdiagnosed and not diagnosed on purpose, the legal or illegal definition of gaslighting me, deviant behaviour, medical abuse, to avoid accountability.

The GMC shut down my case before I got to send the recorded evidence, after telling them what I have recorded, which is undeniable gross malpractice and abuse, that you don't need to be a medical professional to see is abuse. The health board did the same, especially because a board member is implicated, they lied on every one of my complaints, and I have recordings proving they lied, but the NHS who's website says it encourages patients recording for the sake of transparency, does not want the recordings and transparency when it's damning to their staff. The ombudsman just take every lie from the health board, and don't even read the truth from the patient which they accidentally admitted they did with me after giving their final decision. When a patient has recordings proving events doctors are lying happening, any honest investigator should want them.

The GMC wrote on their report that they have no knowledge of events that I told them about in writing, meaning they have knowledge of the events If they know about them to write that they have no knowledge of them. That's how badly they will lie to disregard your evidence.