The Dental Defence Union said the GDC’s proposals would disadvantage certain dental professionals undergoing GDC investigation.

We previously reported that the General Dental Council (GDC) were consulting on proposals that will mean all practice committee and registration appeal committee hearings will be held remotely by default.

In response to the consultation, the DDU is reported to have said

“In many instances, a remote hearing is preferable for all parties but we believe it is wrong for it to be a default position. It should not be necessary for a dental professional wanting an in-person hearing, to first make a case for that, when they are already under the considerable pressure of responding to the allegations being made.”

“Making this change would also put the GDC at odds with the approach taken by other healthcare regulators and in criminal and civil cases. We hope the GDC will reconsider these proposals. The consultation is open until 12 February and we encourage dental professionals to review the proposals and respond with their views on this important issue.”


UK Fitness to Practise News

For the Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland, Rachael Bell, interim head of dental at MDDUS, said:

“Everyone has a right to a fair and public hearing and the GDC’s proposal to default to remote hearings could potentially compromise this fairness.” She pointed out some basic weaknesses in remote hearings: “In cases with conflicting factual accounts, registrants should have the right to see their accuser face-to-face without providing justification for such a request.” Not all respondents will be sitting in a well-equipped office at a large screen with reliable broadband. As Rachael Bell pointed out, “For many, a smartphone may be their only way to participate in remote hearings, which can severely limit registrants ability to engage fully in the process.

“The GDC’s effort to manage resources must not come at the cost of fairness, particularly for those with learning difficulties, sensory impairments, disabilities or other challenges.”

Dental Protection, Dental Director Dr Raj Rattan, expressed serious concerns saying:

“The consequences of a GDC investigation for the dental professional can be profound so it is only right that if they wish to appear in person then they should be afforded this opportunity without the need for an application. We believe they have the right to appear in person before those judging them irrespective of their circumstances or the nature of the allegations.

“Our view is that the default position should be that substantive hearings are in person save where it is agreed by the parties that they be remote or hybrid. While both parties may be content with fully remote hearings for the most part, this should not be interpreted by the GDC as an indicator for dental professionals to lose their right to have an in person or hybrid hearing if they wish this.”

Disclaimer: The accuracy and information of news stories published on this website is accurate on the date of publishing. We endeavour to update stories if information change. You can contact us with change and update requests. Where possible, we will link to sources. Content on this website is for guidance purposes only. We cannot accept any responsibility or liability whatsoever for any action taken, or not taken. You should seek the appropriate legal advice having regard to your own particular circumstances.