A coroner has called on the General Dental Council (GDC) to take action to prevent future deaths in the profession following the death of a dentist by suicide.
In a report last year, the coroner, Katrina Hepburn, highlighted concern with the way the the GDC publicly displays information before proceedings have concluded.
The concerns were published in a ‘Prevention of Future Deaths’ report following the death of a dentist, which was recorded as suicide.
The coroner’s concerns, which feature in the report, read: ‘Whilst it is accepted that the public should have knowledge of concerns raised with regards to a registered dental practitioner, my concern is regarding the level of detail placed on the GDC website in respect of those concerns, particularly when a case is at a stage where the proceedings have not been concluded and the issues not yet determined one way or another.
‘In this case the report ran to seven pages and set out in detail the allegations made under the “background section” and then further detail of the allegations by way of documenting the submissions made by the Counsel acting on behalf of the GDC.’
‘Detrimental effect’
She added: ‘Given that this was an interim order only, my concern is whether the the level of detail provided to the public at that stage of proceedings, was necessary or required…by putting detailed allegations into the public domain via the GDC website, at a stage before any final determination has taken place, I am concerned that others going through a similar process may also suffer a detrimental effect to their mental health.
‘Consequently, in my view, there exists a risk that future deaths will occur.’
The GDC issued a response after the coroner gave it until 11 October 2023 to address the concerns.
In reference to the coroner’s concerns, it said: ‘The GDC’s starting position for what properly ought to be in public about these types of proceedings is that they are judicial proceedings taken in the public interest.
‘You will be aware, including through your own work, that the interests of open justice are of great importance in ensuring that the public can have confidence in the work of regulators or other public sector bodies.
‘In pursuit of the overarching objective of public protection and of maintaining confidence in the professions it is important that the public can see where the GDC takes substantive action including, in the most serious cases, erasure and suspension. It is also important, particularly given the time it takes to get to a substantive hearing, that the public can see that immediate risks are addressed.’
It added: ‘We recognise however, that there are times when matters ought properly to be heard in private, and our legislation, guidance for our panels and our practice allows for this. Our rules set out that hearings before committees (including the IOC) should take place in public.
‘The IOC considers guidance in relation to when hearings should be held in private. If a hearing is held in private, then the details that are heard in private will not be made public.’
Policy review
The regulator confirmed that it is ‘undertaking a review’ of how it hears interim order applications and what information it then publishes.
‘While there are sound legal and policy reasons to be open and transparent about all aspects of our regulation, including interim orders (IOs), as we explain below, we are in the process of undertaking a review of the policy in these areas,’ it said.
It also said that it is now reviewing the policy in relation to the publication of outcomes of IOs, as well as the guidance in relation to holding hearings in public or private.
It said: ‘The aim of the review is to ensure that we are correctly balancing the public interest in open justice against the interests of the registrant, particularly when considering as yet untested allegations.
‘The timeframe for completion of this work depends on the outcome of the review.’
Follow Dentistry on Instagram to keep up with all the latest dental news and trends.
