I had always relied on the support and trust of my local GP surgery to assist with my health concerns. They had been a beacon of hope during some challenging times over the years.  However, a recent experience left me feeling helpless and disregarded.

When I filed valid, genuine and evidenced complaints against a GP at a local surgery, instead of addressing them internally in the correct manner (and whilst the complaints were still ongoing), they side-stepped the complaints, and opted to nominate the GP under complaint to be put forward on the Local Medical Committee (LMC) as a member.

Talk about making a bad situation worse...

I wondered at the time why the responses came slow to the complaints - you 'mattered less' than the Doctor, despite your distress - a clear message, not in patients' interests nor in resolving complaints.

I later found out the same Doctor, once having been elected; (and whilst complaints were still ongoing and unresolved), had another prior existing serious complaint in against them - so that made 2.  Yet the surgery still had forwarded the Doctor to be the representative voice - is that right?

What did that say about the surgery and their attitude towards patients?

This left me feeling alienated from a system that should be dedicated to patient care and resolution.

To make matters worse, LMC leaders, as of May 26, are urging the government to 'protect GPs/staff' from patients who are consistent/persistent in their email complaints ; trying to counter attack by stating that is 'harassment'.  In other words; the LMC is trying to deter and prevent patients from genuinely complaining or get a resolve (usually sorry or doing the right thing; demonstrating a duty of candour is all that is required), leading to further frustration and hurt for a patient - that is deliberate intimidation/scare tactics by the surgery/LMC combined.

You can follow all the correct channels, complaints wise, but it doesn't mean there is resolve at the end; certain aspects may not be looked at or ignored by others in positions of authority, thus you end up back at the surgery; who then target you further/evade accountability yet again for contacting them.

But the fault lies with the surgery - locally.  You wouldn't be complaining otherwise.  Patient complaints are genuine; often the responsible person whom the complaint is made about doesn't apologise or take accountability so the complaint never gets resolved; thus fuelling more complaining/hurt/upset.

Maybe there are further complaints or issues you wish to address as time goes on; as more evidence becomes available - this doesn't constitute harassment and nor should you be bullied or intimidated in to thinking otherwise.

Poor complaint handling...

GP surgeries are the frontline of healthcare, and patients rely on them for trust and transparency.  When patients voice concerns, they deserve to have their issues resolved directly and transparently within the practice.  It’s essential that GP surgeries maintain their responsibility to handle complaints efficiently and fairly.

This recent discovery grossly undermines patient confidence and trust but also has the capacity to strain the relationship between patients and their local surgeries and other surgeries within the PCN network.

Let's propose a structured protocol for GP surgeries, emphasizing the need for full, complete internal investigation, no matter the time or cost by all partners, Practice Managers (not just 1 complaint handler), with more patient input, consideration, advocacy and resolution of complaints before considering nominating Doctors as LMC members.  Also to ensure that if there are repeated complaints - consider whether the GP should be forwarded for such a role. 

The problems with 'corrupt' Doctors as LMC members':

• they can leverage their institutional authority for personal gain, political positioning
• they can weaponize/suppress the patients complaints process/bury complaints about themselves and their business partners
• they can participate in conflicts of interests, NHS contract negotiations.  This can manifest in self dealing allocations, funding within ICB  by shaping contract terms to financially favour their own practices or corporate medical syndicates  over smaller, independent practices
• they can undeclare self serving commercial ties, profiting; whilst lobbying the NHS to accept those services
• they can shield a 'toxic workplace' by silencing/bullying practice staff in to making complaints, reporting bullying etc or convince the committee to ignore the grievances

A LMC Doctor could for example, gain knowledge and then use it against complainants with genuine, evidenced complaints against them, thus significantly influencing the complaint outcome, leaving no resolve, fuelling more frustration.

This scrutiny over nominees, would uphold the integrity of the patient-surgery relationship; and ensure more timely and compassionate responses to patient concerns.

By signing and sharing this petition, you can help make a change in the healthcare complaint process, ensuring GP surgeries take their direct responsibilities seriously and prioritize patient care/satisfaction and also ensure a happy workforce can be free from bullying.