The LDA welcomes revalidation if it is a process of keeping all doctors up-to date to meet with the standards of Good Medical Practise.

2. It must be noted that the need for revalidation came as a result of the incompetence of highly placed substantive doctors with impressive logbook numbers (though unimpressive outcomes). The process must apply equally in all respects to all categories of doctors, but must take into account differing needs and circumstances of individual doctors.
3. We do not believe that revalidation will prevent another Bristol or Shipman case. The causes of those are more to do with the culture of secrecy and coverups in the profession than competence. Unless attitudes and cultures drastically change, this process will not protect the public.
4. During the consultation phase it has emerged that the GMC lacks adequate knowledge of locums and how they work.
5. It must be recognised that locums and doctors with atypical careers do not receive the same facilities for training, study leave and CPD as substantive NHS doctors.
6. It must be remembered that a doctor needs to be a safe doctor for patients regardless of career pathway. If fitness to practise is demonstrated by a safe and competent track record, revalidation should not be denied.
7. Revalidation must not become a tool to compel NHS service for doctors. Qualifying as a doctor and working and functioning as one is not the same as working full-time in the NHS in the UK.
8. Revalidation processes should respect the rights of locums and the duties of other medical professionals to locums.
9. Revalidation must be exercised according to the principles of proportionality, fairness and respect for Human Rights.
10. Revalidation will not work without adequate funding. The crises resulting from the hasty implementation of calmanisation without funding should be a sufficient lesson for all.
11. Locums and atypical doctors must not be victimised on account of systems failures, and the denial of opportunities.
12. If a doctor has made effort to keep up-to-date, as shown by his portfolio, and has a good and safe track record, revalidation must not be refused.
13. We believe substantive full-time doctors are taken for granted. Regulation of these must be more rigorous than hitherto. Revalidation of these must not be regarded as a fato accompli and that of locums a presumptuous failure.
14. The Audit Commission report clearly stated that the vast majority of locums are good and excellent doctors. There is an unfounded prejudice against locum doctors which must now cease.
Page 2 of 6
1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6
Page 2

Who's Who ?
Become a member of the LDA
Current issues
LDA annual report
Documents and LDA comments
Frequently  Asked Questions
Our contact details

Suggestions box