Neel Kothari shares why, in one particular area, more regulation is needed from the General Dental Council (GDC).
I must admit that I never thought I would be writing an article calling for more regulation, especially from the GDC. But there is one area of our professional lives that I believe is so vague that we urgently need further clarity and a set of ground rules to minimise the risk of abuse.
Put simply, we as a profession need a better idea about when it is appropriate to refer other registrants to the GDC.
GDC standard 8.1.1. details the obligation upon registrants to raise concerns about fellow colleagues that may compromise patient care. The intention of this standard is no doubt laudable, but a far cry from the reality of what is happening.
Almost every case that I have been aware of involving ‘blue on blue’ referrals to the GDC has happened alongside other issues that, in my opinion, have clouded the integrity of the referral.
Further, GDC registrants have a unique insight into the rules and regulations, making it almost impossible to untangle what is a wholly genuine referral with that of an interpersonal business (or otherwise) dispute.
Wide-scale issue
Dr Chris Waith from DCO Dental told Dentistry magazine: ‘Every single blue on blue referral I have heard of was done for either business or purely malicious reasons.’ Waith informs me that he is aware of several cases where associate dentists have left practices being owed money, and when chasing this up have been threatened with a GDC referral.
His experience is not a unique one and, in my opinion, this is happening on a far wider scale than is being reported.
I recently carried out a social media poll asking dentists previously involved in (or with awareness of) ‘blue on blue’ referrals to the GDC, what proportion of these were wholly genuine or not. At the time of writing, 27 people believed that the referral was made alongside business (or other) disputes (94%) with only two people believing that the referral was made for wholly genuine purposes (6%).
The purpose of this article isn’t to dissuade referrals to the GDC. Where appropriate, it’s both in our interests and that of the public’s that genuine concerns are addressed. But referrals from other registrants differ significantly from those made by the public, primarily due to the business relations in place.
A breach of standards
Further, the act of sending a malicious referral is in itself a breach of GDC standards, specifically, 6.1.2 which states: ‘You must treat colleagues fairly and with respect, in all situations and all forms of interaction and communication. You must not bully, harass, or unfairly discriminate against them.’
It seems wholly inappropriate that a ‘blue on blue’ referral should hinge upon the interpersonal relationship of two registrants, yet this is precisely what is being observed by myself and a significant proportion of GDC registrants.
It’s my opinion that we as a profession need more than eerie silence from our regulatory bodies and professional organisations over this matter.
So, as atypical as this may be for one of my articles, this is perhaps the first and last time I call upon the GDC to set about issuing us as a profession with more regulation.
Read more from Neel Kothari:
- What can NHS dentistry expect from the upcoming election?
- Why we need to bring back dental reference officers
- Has dental nurses’ registration been a success?
- UK dentistry: expectation versus reality
- Are excessive regulations endangering the public?
Follow Dentistry.co.uk on Instagram to keep up with all the latest dental news and trends.
