How the GMC can do better

How the GMC can do better Narinder Kapur consultant neuropsychologist Much of what Abbasi says is understandable, but saying that the General Medical Council is “accountable to no one” is incorrect.1 The GMC has some accountability to the Professional Standards Authority (PSA), although this needs to be strengthened, and the PSA should also be better scrutinised. I agree that the GMC needs substantive reform. When a doctor dies while under investigation, and this death can be linked to the investigation, this should automatically trigger an independent external review. Major emphasis is given to “false positive cases,” in which the GMC pursued an investigation into a doctor but should not have done so or made errors; but there should also be scrutiny of “false negative cases,” in which the GMC refused to properly investigate doctors who behaved badly. In addition to the PSA, there should be a second layer of external scrutiny: for example, the GMC should be required to appear annually before the Health and Social Care Select Committee. There should be no time limit for looking at past cases in which the GMC might have acted incorrectly—the key determinants should be whether key lessons can be learnt, and whether those who suffered are still alive.