Almost all the dental professionals participating in a recent online poll conducted by Matt Everatt, editor-in-chief of Laboratory, unanimously expressed their mistrust on the General Dental Council’s (GDC) capacity to regulate.
A recent poll has revealed that an overwhelming majority of 99.5 percent of dental professionals believe that the GDC is not suitable for regulatory purposes. This poll was conducted in response to the GDC's involvement in the Williams case, and its aim was to gauge the profession's opinion on the GDC's effectiveness.
The results were staggering, with only a mere 0.45 pc of participants expressing confidence in the GDC's ability to regulate. The poll, which sought the views of dental professionals through two Facebook groups, posed the question: "Do you think the GDC is fit to regulate any more?" The findings from the Dental Technicians Great Britain Facebook group indicated that only two members voted "Yes," while a resounding majority of 153 members voted "No." Similarly, in the For Dentists, By Dentists Facebook group, a solitary vote favoured the GDC's fitness to regulate, while a significant majority of 512 votes expressed disagreement.
"The results are alarming," said Matt Everatt, editor-in-chief of Laboratory and director of S4S Dental Laboratory. He expressed concerns about the GDC versus Williams case, highlighting the regulator's draconian and aggressive approach to patient safeguarding. He noted, "The worrying thing about this case is the use of NHS rules that neither the NHS, GDC, nor the defendant properly understood. Despite this lack of understanding, the GDC pursued charges of dishonesty and fraud against the dentist.”
According to him, the situation should serve as a wake-up call for both registrants and the regulator to reevaluate the fitness to practice process. It is essential for the GDC to act as a partner to registrants, focusing on protecting patients rather than meticulously searching for mistakes to justify suspensions or removal from the GDC register.
"Practising in fear is not helpful to anyone," said Everatt. He believed that a more approachable regulator, working hand in hand with registrants, could provide a world-class service that prioritises patients' health and well-being.
Everatt emphasised that instead of scrutinising dentists' notes to find faults in fitness to practise cases, the GDC should focus on preventative education and proactive registration.
He suggested providing support for completing CPD cycles, offering courses, and assisting when things go wrong. It was crucial to recognise that mistakes could happen without malicious intent. Everatt hoped that the GDC would take a more inclusive and productive approach.