Dental Protection: Government reform to dental regulation must be meaningful and timely
NewsPosted by: Dental Design 15th June 2021
Dental Protection has called on the Government to make meaningful reform to the regulation of dental professionals, ensuring the nuances of the practice of dentistry are adequately accounted for in any reforms undertaken.
The comments were made in response to DHSC’s consultation: ‘Regulating healthcare professionals, protecting the public’, which covers all regulated professions.
As well as granting the GDC discretion on when to investigate fitness to practise concerns, the dental defence organisation called for reforms to the 1984 Dentists Act as a matter of priority. Dental Protection is urging the Government to clarify the timetable for GDC legislative reform. Currently, only reform of the medical regulator has been confirmed to take effect by spring 2022.
Dental Director, Raj Rattan, said: “Dental Protection has long argued for reform to the regulation that underpins the GDC. Vital changes to the 1984 Dentists Act, which governs the GDC, are seriously overdue. Despite several amendments over the years, the Act remains outdated, requiring the regulator to conduct some of its operations in ways that are not always in the best interests of patients or professionals.
“Much needed reform will enable the regulator to streamline its processes, improve efficiency, and reduce the number of investigations into less serious allegations, requiring the conclusion of investigations in a timely manner.
“Following this consultation, we would urge the government to clarify the timescales for passing secondary legislation to amend the Dentists Act.
“Dental Protection is particularly calling for reform to be prioritised in Fitness to Practise investigations, in order to reduce fear across the dental profession and increase confidence in the GDC. This includes giving the GDC discretion to decide whether and how to investigate a fitness to practise concern to avoid thousands of dental professionals going through an unnecessary investigation each year.
“We are also concerned at the proposal for the GDC to be provided with just two grounds for investigation – ‘lack of competence’ and ‘misconduct’, with the currently separate ground for action relating to ‘health’ removed from the legislation. Concerns relating to a dentist’s health would instead be investigated under ‘lack of competence’ grounds.
“At Dental Protection, we understand how stressful it is for dental professionals to be under investigation by the GDC and we believe that categorising those with health concerns as having a ‘lack of competence’ could exacerbate their health issues, and discourage registrants from seeking help earlier. We strongly believe health should be retained as a separate category.”
