click to enlarge

What is Chiropractic?

The purpose of this discussion forum was to bring to the attention of the chiropractic profession  the way the GCC operated, particularly its two executive officers Margaret Coats and Greg Price. Price was exposed for his misdeeds  and resigned. Coats  a much shrewder operator is still in power. In my opinion she was best summed up by Maxine White after she left the GCC, like Maxine I believe Coats got her way by bullying and intimidating people, unfortunately too few chiropractors have been prepared to stand up to her.

I will be resigning from the chiropractic register  and what goes on at the GCC will no longer be relevant to me, therefore I will be closing the Forums on September 1. Llike another Margaret this one is not for turning either, unlike the registrar of the Nursing and Midwifery Council who did the honorable thing and took responsibility for the misdeeds on her watch and resigned. I am reminded of Margaret Thatchers cabinet in its final days or how she runs the show now in Spitting Image. Perhaps this is why Peter Dixon did not accept her resignation in November when he had the chance, If Coats stays

.

Prosecutions and persecutions were part of the occupational career outlook for newly graduated chiropractors in years before World War I. For more than a decade, California was the battleground. "Nowhere was the conflict with the medical authorities more intense, nor the prosecution of chiropractors pursued with more relentless policy" wrote a chiropractic historian in 1931. "Attacked on all sides weakened by defection within the ranks and with hundreds sent to prison, only an appeal to the public through the launching of an initiative petition finally won success". (Chiropractic an Illustrated History, Mosby)

Picture of Dr B. Franklin Lear of Warren, Ohio who was jailed for practicing chiropractic in 1913.

In 2008 UK chiropractors are again working in fear.

.

Regulation and GCC style natural justice Century 21    

In May 2007 Richard Lanigan DC was elected by his colleagues to be a member of the General Chiropractic Council. Richard was the only chiropractor not selected by one of the chiropractic associations (for the supposedly impartial GCC), yet  received the second highest number of votes in the election. On Monday 3rd March a resolution by the GCC chairman Peter Dixon to have Richard removed from council was successful by a vote of thirteen votes to four ( Richard was not allowed to vote). This method of intimidating Council members to tow the line has been used three times before. Each time lawyers for the chiropractic council member accused, pointed out the process being used to remove the chiropractor was contrary to "natural justice" and the Human Rights Act  and as a result the chairman's efforts to remove the dissident failed.

.

This time Richard Lanigan was prevented from having his solicitor present at the hearing. Peter Dixon, the GCC Chairman, called the meeting, proposed the resolution for Richard's removal, collected the evidence, and chaired the hearing. He refused to disclose information and then voted against Richard in the knowledge that judicial review is costly and the GCC has very deep pockets, filled with chiropractors' registration fees. Not surprisingly, Peter Dixon also refused to record the hearing. Anyone who thinks this could not happen to them should speak to some of the many chiropractors who have experienced GCC due process, chiropractors who had that same thought just before they received the GCC notice of complaint.

.

Dr Fred Courtney (below right)was able to adjust  felow prisoners in jail in Los Angeles, there is no adjusting bench at the GCC offices in fact very little about chiropractic and its history. Only a leaflet at reception "How to make a complaint".

.

The GCC has published the reasons for Richard's removal from council which were:"Disclosure to another person who is not a member of the Council, without the consent of the Council, information which was known to Mr Lanigan in confidence by reason of his membership of the Council; and/or Acting contrary to the best interests of the Council". In his statement at the GCC hearing Richard pointed out that while his tenure on council was  for a limited period, chiropractic is his profession for life. A Council member's primary duty is to the General Chiropractic, unfortunately the GCC seem more interested in pleasing The Council for Health Care Regulatory Excellence (CHRE) than balancing the need to protect the public with the interests of the chiropractic profession.

.

Having raised his concerns a number of times with Peter Dixon and then approaching the entire council Richard failed to get any of these concerns on a meeting agenda for discussion, it was then he decided to contact the professional associations. Richard told the Council at his hearing that he could no longer subscribe to the principle of collective responsibility of a Council which seems to have decided that statutory self-regulation is the end which justifies looking the other way, when the means being used to regulate are questionable and may bring the profession into disrepute.

.

An example of these concerns was when GCC executive officer  (who on occasions had assumed the responsibilities of the registrar) Greg Price had to resign in 2006 for posting derogatory comments about registered Chiropractors on the internet, he was reported to the police, yet the GCC refuses to acknowledge their mistakes or apologise to the chiropractic profession for the actions of this rogue employee. They refuse to explain why they helped cover his tracks when he began work at another regulatory body or conduct an independent investigation to see if Mr Price had prejudiced any of the cases brought against chiropractors of the ilk he had disparaged on the internet.

.

Investigation of complaints against members of council are completely unsatisfactory and definitely not independent. It would be like asking friends of chiropractors to investigate  allegations made by patients, Richard stated on this site after his removal.     

The GCC are ignoring the  criticism coming from the vast majority of the profession, former members of council and even the Chiropractic Patients Association (CPA). The CPA represent the very people the GCC have a statutory duty to protect, yet they have endorsed the findings of the 2006 Bankside Law survey. Peter Dixon the GCC chairman called the survey “questionable”, nevertheless showed no desire to perform another survey to disprove the Bankside Law findings. Some council members are of the view that its “normal” for the regulator and its Chief Executive to be so unpopular.  

.

Government plans for regulatory reform

While the UK Government's programme for reforming the regulatory bodies would seem like a godsend, announcing last year that “regulatory bodies must change”. The chiropractic profession can have little confidence in the Government’s ability to achieve its goal of  “greater patient and public representation” on a new reformed GCC, when the plan is only more “professional”  lay committee people on “New GCC”, and chiropractors who are appointed by the appointments commission, rather than elected by their peers.

.

“New GCC” is to supposed to have “faster, more transparent procedures and develop meaningful accountability to the public and the health service”. In theory this sounds wonderful except the UK Government is relying on the very same GCC management who have been anything but transparent and accountable to “modernise the regulation of the chiropractic profession” and produce “New GCC”

.

The option for chiropractors is to continue meandering along the path of least resistance and risk ending up like Osteopaths in the US or, do something. We have only four options and come December 2008 we must have decided.

.

1)“New GCC” and risk ending up like the osteopaths in the US  The GCC

2)Statutory Self Regulation and seek legal advice on paying next years registration fees into an Escrow account and negotiate change at the GCC. 

3)Regulation by the Health Professions Council.

4)Come off the register and set up as the Democratic Osteopathic Council have done www.docouncil.org.uk 

.

For statutory self regulation to work the regulator has to be completely detached from the bodies representing the profession and the profession has to be able to present itself as a homogenous group. Horse trading, selfish agendas, lack of good governance is preventing effective and fair regulation.  

                                                                                                      Joseph Goebbels

Before posting messages read forum rules here >>>

.

.