Policy responses and statements

Name of organisation:

General Medical Council

Name of policy document:

Draft GMC/CHMS Guidance on Student Fitness to Practise

Deadline for response:

25 September 2006

Background: The General Medical Council (GMC) and the Council of Heads of Medical Schools (CHMS) have a joint Working Group to consider how to improve student fitness to practise in the UK. The objective of the Working Group is to discuss and determine principles and practical arrangements through which universities and the GMC can confirm the fitness to practise of medical school students and graduates at the point of entry to the medical register.

The two organisations have now jointly developed draft guidance for medical schools and students on student fitness to practise for informal feedback in Summer 2006 relating to:

(a) The professional behaviour expected by students
(b) Areas of student conduct that can cause concern
(c) The key elements of student fitness to practise arrangements

The work streams will be brought together to form one comprehensive document.

COMMENTS ON
GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL
DRAFT GMC/CHMS GUIDANCE ON STUDENT FITNESS TO PRACTISE

The Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh is pleased to respond to the General Medical Council on its consultation on the Draft GMC/CHMS Guidance on Student Fitness to Practise.   The College has taken advice from Fellows with significant undergraduate teaching responsibilities before compiling this response.  In general, the proposals are welcome as they help to clarify issues for medical schools and students alike.  Our comments are as follows:

Annex A (Professional Behaviour by Medical Students/Principles for Students’ Fitness to Practise)

The College applauds the approach which mirrors the guidance available for doctors after graduation and would encourage all students and their tutors to be familiar with the principles.

Annex B (Guidance on Areas of Conduct and Sanctions)

Students often express concern about the scope of misconduct for medical students and are worried about limits and possible sanctions.  This guidance will improve understanding about medical professionalism and its importance in undergraduate and postgraduate practice.  The College understands that individual medical schools require close adherence to ethical codes and an attempt to standardise this is welcome.  The examples included in paragraph 21 are helpful, but it may be advisable to emphasise that each case will be judged individually according to the circumstances and context.  Also defining “disciplinary action” may be helpful to allow students to make an honest and full declaration when eventually applying for provisional registration.  For example, students may question whether to include counselling over problems or investigations without sanctions in their response to the following question, “Are you or have you ever been subject to disciplinary action by your medical school?”.

Annex C (Key Elements in Student Fitness to Practise Arrangements)

This guidance provides a useful quality standard for the conduct of Fitness to Practise procedures and the College assumes it would feature in external quality assurance activity undertaken by the GMC.  Medical schools may welcome support from the GMC in training panel members to ensure consistency of approach, and in advice on the impact of the Data Protection Act and Freedom of Information legislation

Copies of this response are available from:

Lesley Lockhart,
Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh,
9 Queen Street,
Edinburgh,
EH2 1JQ.

Tel: 0131 225 7324    ext 608
Fax: 0131 220 3939

[2 October 2006]