Dental Care Professionals face harsh sanctions when unrepresented at tribunals, says Dental Protection
NewsPosted by: Dental Design 23rd August 2022
Nearly three quarters (72%) of UK Dental Care Professionals (DCPs) did not have legal representation when facing a GDC fitness to practise hearing according to figures obtained by Dental Protection covering 2018-21. This compares to 34% of dentists who were not represented.
The figures, obtained by Dental Protection through an FOI request to the GDC, also showed that those DCPs without legal representation were more likely to receive a harsher sanction. 77% were either suspended or erased from the register, and only 10% were concluded with no adverse finding.
In comparison, 32% of DCPs with legal representation were either suspended or erased from the dentists register, and 39% were concluded with no adverse finding.
Dental Protection is urging dental nurses, technicians, therapists, clinical dental technicians, orthodontic therapists and hygienists to consider the protection they have in place and whether this includes support for GDC investigations, so they do not face the process alone.
Yvonne Shaw, Deputy Director at Dental Director at Dental Protection, said: “These figures serve as a powerful reminder of how important it is to be able to request assistance with GDC investigations. The difference in outcomes when a DCP has legal representation at their hearing is stark.
“Dental Protection supports a range of dental professionals from the moment a GDC complaint is received, to its conclusion at a hearing, providing the very best legal defence and a team of professionals committed to achieving the best possible outcome for members. I cannot imagine facing this lengthy and complex process alone, without someone fighting my corner. Sadly though, the majority of DCPs do, and go on to face tougher sanctions at their hearing when compared to those with legal representation.
“Whilst employed members of the dental team may be protected from clinical negligence claims through practice or hospital schemes, these may not include support with GDC investigations. Similarly, some individual products may not extend beyond claims indemnity. These products are designed to ensure patients are able to seek compensation if they are harmed and satisfy the legal requirement for claims indemnity.
“GDC investigations impact on mental health and reputation, and for some have career ending implications. It is important that DCPs understand the nature of the protection they have in place and whether they should obtain additional support for GDC investigations.”
A spokesperson for the GDC said:
“While the vast majority of dental professionals will never be involved in a fitness to practise investigation, we have spoken before about the importance of engaging in the process for those who have had a concern raised about them. The findings of our research on The concept of Seriousness in fitness to practise, published earlier this year, highlighted the potential for more adverse outcomes in cases where professionals either do not engage or where they represent themselves. It also found that dentists were reported as having higher levels of representation when compared to dental care professionals. The requirements for healthcare professionals’ indemnity are set by Government and we will provide support as needed for any work on this issue.”
