May 2009

Member details:

The Ethics Committee continues to develop and support the BOS throughout the year.

Meetings: 3^rd November 2008

Date of next meeting 12^th May 2009

There have been a number of contacts with patients and practitioners with a variety of difficulties which have generally been resolved.

Issues Addressed:

Consent

There has been considerable work done on the production of the consent form as well as the consent advice sheet. The advice sheet has been accepted by the BOS. The consent form is a rather more difficult issue. It will be discussed at the meeting on the 12^th May. However, we feel it is inappropriate to produce a form that adequately covers all groups within the BOS as well as individual Hospital Trusts & PCTs. It is likely that the advice of the Ethics committee that no specific form is introduced. The accepted advice sheet should to allow members to produce their own individually tailored consent form.

Unprofessional Conduct:

1. Issues surrounding the breakdown of a partnership agreement. A member brought to the Ethics Committee details of a disagreement between a partnership identifying serious allegations of unethical behaviour and fraud. Whilst the Ethics Committee and BOS have been sympathetic and wish to support individual member involved the allegations were serious and of such a nature that the member was advised to seek legal representation. It was not felt that the BOS was in a position to investigate specific issues as it does not have the legal or professional competency to do so.

2. Alleged unprofessional letters and comments made from one specialist to another. Discussions were had with one member regarding his feeling that comments had been made undermining his practice by another member. The issue was discussed and the member concerned was asked to gather specific evidence. Ultimately, the BOS and Ethics Committees role is to support its members and mediate where possible. This can only be done with hard evidence. The situation is ongoing.

3. A BOS member has written highlighting the article by Andrew McCance in Dental Tribune which appears to encourage GDPs to undertake orthodontic treatment using Clearstep. Although this type of advertising is disappointing it was not illegal.

4. A letter from John Mew was published in the Journal of the Michigan Dental Association and contained an attack on Dr Jay Bowman, a well-known and respected Michigan orthodontist. Dr Bowman was affronted by the comments and wrote to the BOS – sympathy was given but no action taken.

5. A recent editorial in the BDJ from Mike Mew (April 2009, Volume 206 No 8 pp393-442)gives little hope that the Mew saga is over.

6. The question of a store voucher given as a reward to referring practitioners has been raised. The GDC confirmed that it is not illegal to offer a gift as a reward/thank you but it is not permitted to offer an inducement to make the referral, in advance. Although rewards are permitted by the GDC, they were not in the spirit of operating within the wider scene of Managed Clinical Networks. Their advice is to avoid this practice if possible.

Advertising

A complaint was made by a member regarding an advert in Yell.com which states that the dentists in a practice were Orthodontic Specialists. When investigating through Yell.com the term specialist appeared if one search item was put in (specifically looking for the practice) and did not if a different term was put in (searching “orthodontist” in an area without specific reference to the individual practice). The practice was asked to ensure this was rectified.

Mr. J.H. Noar

Chairman Ethics Committee