RE: GMC unveils advice on safe reflection in wake of Bawa-Garba case

Iain Richards — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 22:05:42 GMT

This is being discussed on another group. Apparently the court didn't use her reflective account, but the GMC did.

RE: GMC unveils advice on safe reflection in wake of Bawa-Garba case

Beats — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 20:52:24 GMT

Thanks for that insightful post, Ben, especially the link to GMC advice.

Re the RCVS requirement, I remain to be convinced that this will be beneficial rather than bureacratic:

A hypothetical:

"We will not [Ed: until we change this policy] ask for reflective records from veterinary surgeons or veterinary nurses as part of our concerns, investigation or disciplinary processes." [in answer to will my reflections be used against me by RCVS, https://www.rcvs.org.uk/lifelong-learning/continuing-professional-development-cpd/how-do-i-record-my-cpd/]

So it will be a requirement to reflect on one's CPD and record this reflection on the 1CPD platform. So presumably one could be (from 2022) disciplined for NOT recording some reflective musings to a standard acceptable to the RCVS on the 1CPD platform.

However if the reflective records cannot feature as part of the disciplinary process, then presumably it would be impossible for the RCVS to demonstrate [until this policy changes] in a disciplinary hearing (or indeed a lower level of the concerns process) that the reflective accounts were not up to scratch.

RCVS: "This MRCVS has not made reasonable attempts at reflective accounts on the 1CPD platform"

Independent Disciplinary Committee "I have only your opinion on that, where is the proof"

RCVS: "Sorry, DC, we cannot show you the reflective records, you can only take our word on it"

So if, hypothetically, a free-thinking MRCVS chooses to record his reflections on each occasion as "Boo-Boo-Butt", then those reflections are as valid as those who have approached the task as requested from the point of view of achieving compliance with the new CPD requirements [until this policy changes]?

So, as the policy stands, there is no real requirement to record reflective musings at all then?

However, if the policy is changed, then there is no freedom to record one's genuine reflective musings, as one's thoughts may then be used against one by the RCVS. So if one likes to reflect in a written computer-based manner [as opposed to, say, in the privacy of one's head while walking to work], one would be best advised to continue to do this in one's own personal files not accessible by one's regulator [and undoubtedly more accessible and familiar to one], and provide a sanitised reflection in line with the regulators viewpoint/objectives (devoid of any potentially incriminating thoughts) on the 1CPD platform?

Does this point to a problem with mandatory reflection?

From a purely academic standpoint, can mandated reflection actually be true reflection (whatever that may mean)?