Fitness to Practice: Determination on Impairment
The Panel has now considered whether your fitness to practise is impaired by reason of misconduct.
The Panel has considered the submissions of 17,000 doctors on the streets in Westminster, all of the major UK newspapers and media television news services, 3000 signatories to the letter of misconduct submitted to the Cabinet Office, the 53,000 junior doctors currently in the UK and 223,000 signatories to the online e-government petition “To debate a vote of no confidence in Jeremy Hunt”. We have also considered submissions from the BMJ, and the Doctors and Dental Remuneration Body.
The proven facts of your case can be categorised into four areas, as follows:
- Honesty and integrity
- Standard of care
- Professional conduct
Juniordoctorblog referred the Panel to the GMC’s guidance, ‘Good Medical Practice’ (April 2013) (GMP), which sets out the duties and responsibilities of a registered medical practitioner. Specifically, the headline duty of maintaining trust, and paragraphs 7, 15, 20, 36, 37 and 69 which state:
Duties of a doctor: Maintaining trust: Be honest and open and act with integrity.
7. You must be competent in all aspects of your work, including management, research and teaching.
15. You must provide a good standard of practice and care.
20. You must keep records that contain personal information about patients, colleagues or others securely, and in line with data protection requirement
36. You must treat colleagues fairly and with respect.
37. You must be aware of how your behaviour may influence others within and outside the team.’
69. When communicating publicly, including speaking to or writing in the media, you must maintain patient confidentiality.
The Panel’s decision
In deciding whether your fitness to practise is impaired, the Panel has exercised its own judgement. It has borne in mind its responsibility to protect the public interest and, in particular, to protect patients.
The Panel considered whether the admitted and proven facts in your case amounted to misconduct that was so serious as to impair your fitness to practice.
In regards to dishonesty: Found proved. On repeated occasions you have misrepresented several research papers and several government polices, which this Panel would expect you to have a good knowledge of. We find your dishonest conduct deliberate. Specific evidence considered:
- Misrepresenting the 2015 Fremantle BMJ paper, ‘11,000’ deaths at the weekend on frequent occasions; Telegraph, BBC, Kings Fund, Guardian. Which may have led to active harm to patients.
- Misrepresenting the HISLAC data , in a discussion about junior doctors contracts on the Today programme, on the morning of the second Junior Doctor protest.
- Stating in Parliament ‘No doctor will see a paycut’ in the House of Commons, then immediately backtracking.
- Claiming the BMA is misleading members – the Panel considered evidence from independent doctors numbering in the tens of thousands on Twitter, and protesting around the country, independent and government petition websites, and newspaper interviews, and found no evidence of BMA ‘misrepresentation’.
- Claiming #Dangermoney is a ‘colloquial‘ term in the NHS- despite 99.67% of 1201 doctors surveyed never having heard the term.
In regards to breach of confidentiality: Found proved. You have broken the most fundamental aspect of healthcare, and show no remorse over your behaviour.
- On July 18th 2015, at 2:34pm, you uploaded a photo to over 70,000 twitter followers which contained the names and operations of several patients at a major London hospital.
- You have made no formal apology
In regards to poor standard of care: Found proved
- This Panel understands you have approximately 65 million patients in your care at any given time
- This Panel understands that the NHS deficit budget is estimated to be £2 billion this year alone
- This Panel understands you have misunderstood the budget and the proposed ‘additional funds’ on several occasions – this mismanagement is actively harming patients
- This Panel considered evidence of the ‘Hunt Effect’ detailing patients coming to active harm having been misinformed by yourself in regards to weekend staffing and safety: formal evidence is still pending.
- For proposing a contract purported to be ‘safe for patients’ but which removes the fundamental safeguards that protected patients from doctors forced to work overlong hours.
In regards to poor professional conduct: Found proved
- Your treatment of your colleagues has been considered: your conduct during the recent Opposition Day debate was inappropriate- disrespectful to fellow MPs and colleagues in the NHS, including walking out halfway through the debate.
- Your comments regarding the ‘Monday to Friday’ culture of the NHS, your belief that a computer could do a doctors job, your claim that doctors are ‘misled’ by their union, and are incapable of studying the evidence themselves and making their own decisions, your fundamental lack of insight into the entire system you are in charge of.
- You have not treated colleagues fairly or with respect.
Mr Hunt is found to be impaired in his fitness to practice. He will…
Not a doctor?
Apologies Mr Hunt. Please receive your affects at the door:
- A copy of the 2015 Fremantle BMJ paper, torn, and heavily annotated with exclamation marks and maniacal laughter.
- A copy of the Junior Doctors Contract, which apparently does not yet exist, but is ready to be imposed.
- The keys to one of the most equitable health systems in the world
- The health of 65 million people.