Is the RCVS disciplinary process fit for purpose ...


At the first Council meeting of 2025 it was revealed the College thought six months was 'an appropriate timeframe,'  to complete the initial phase of a disciplinary investigation ... six months ! For anyone who has been on the receiving end it feels more like six years. 

I'm not sure if things have changed, but it used to be a letter would arrive out of the blue saying a complaint had been made and the College would be in touch in due course. No mention of who made the complaint, no mention of what it related to, nothing. Then, eventually, a more detailed 'charge' would arrive to which the defendant was required to respond. After that, months of to and fro correspondence, of endless picking and probing. The more it became obvious the original claim was vexatious, the more they dug. The impression was the PIC would not be content unless they drew blood, until they found something, anything, no matter how small or unrelated, to pin on you.

Most practitioners who have been caught up in the cogs of this machine would agree the process is slow, vindictive, and on occasions, incompetent. Not what we might expect from a College that brags endlessly about its 'compassion.'

We need to be like other regulators apparently, the GMC was mentioned. LINK That will be the same GMC that has been imposing fitness to practice sanctions on 'vulnerable' doctors, 28 of whom have died from suicide or suspected suicide during the GMC's protracted investigations. So 'kind' ... so 'compassionate.'

The LAGs (Lawyers and Arts Grads) who run the College, seem to regard the whole disciplinary process as a bit of side hussle, just another part of their too-large and constantly growing remit. If hard working practitioners (that's us) get minced who cares (and anyway, they can always blame it on the CMA, or Global Warming ... or something). 

The obvious solution to the current mess is to devolve disciplinary matters to an efficient, dedicated, independent, full time, professional body, with a requirement to settle all preliminary enquiries within a six week timeframe. The College would then have the bandwidth to address the serious question of the day, morale (which has never been lower), or the exodus from practice (which has never been higher). 

When questioned by the Vet Times, the RCVS CEO didn't seem to think there was much wrong with the disciplinary process. She certainly didn't suggest an independent body could do things better - and why would she. Who ever heard of an Emperor reducing the size of the Imperium ? 

PS Kudos to Will Wilkinson who raised the matter at Council and at least had a go, well done Will 👍


If you want to read more posts, click on the arrow 🠈 on the top left of the page or the 'MORE POSTS' button at the bottom. 

Popular posts from this blog

How Does Second Victim Syndrome Affect (veterinary) Surgeons?

Image
  This is reprinted from a human medical publication.  IMHO it is just as applicable to vets. It's a longish read but well worth it. How Does Second Victim Syndrome Affect Surgeons? Joël Pitre, Dr | 04 April 20 24 Second victim syndrome  (SVS) refers to the trauma experienced by a healthcare provider following a  medical complication or error . It is estimated that nearly 50% of healthcare providers will face this syndrome at least once in their career. Moreover, as much as 20% of hospitalized patients may experience a complication. Some specialties are particularly exposed to SVS, including surgery, obstetrics and gynecology. Most published research does not focus on surgical specialties, even though surgeons face stressful situations and technical challenges daily, making them particularly susceptible to SVS. Strength and emotional control are part of the typical surgeon stereotype. Consequently, the occurrence of a surgical complication is most often approached on...
Read more

Governance and the RCVS. No see, no hear, no give a monkey's what the membership think.

Image
  In April the results of the 2024 RCVS Council were announced. Three candidates were elected, Zara Kennedy, Sinéad Bennett and David Barrett. Two of the candidates ( Sinéad Bennett and David Barrett)  made it clear in their manifestoes that they were opposed to an appointed Council. Looking at the manifestoes of all 14 candidates, it appears that 7 were openly opposed to an appointments system, some vehemently. The only candidate directly associated with the proposal, ex-President Kate Richards, was defeated. Scroll forward six weeks to the 10th of June and the first day of the RCVS consultation on Governance. What do we find ? An acceptance of the membership's near total rejection of an appointed Council ? Far from it. Instead we have page upon page of biased 'recommendations' and a tone deaf video by an ex-President  here  which is billed as 'An Introduction to our Good Governance Consultation.'  In reality it's a one-sided propaganda piece in which we'...
Read more

Groundhog Day.

Image
Well it's Council election time in Punxsutawney, and like 2024, Samizdat believes the 2025 election is still about defending your right to vote . It’s about ensuring the membership retain the right to hold the  RCVS accountable through an elected Council.  Over the last few years the College has borne down heavily on what we the membership are permitted to know.  On one occasion in 2020, a retired police officer was engaged by the College to interrogate Council members suspected of leaking information about a proposed change to the disciplinary process !  (I don’t know what I find more depressing about this, the fact that the College thought they could get away with it or the spineless Council letting them).  In June 2022 the College imposed a revised 'How we work' statement, effectively preventing Council members from publicly discussing RCVS policy which they deemed to be confidential (Ball gag and no balls) .  Since then the ability of the membership (...
Read more