Anaesthetists United Launch Legal Challenge Against GMC Over Physician Associate Regulation
Anaesthetists United, a group representing anaesthetists of all grades, has secured over £50,000 to fund a legal challenge against the General Medical Council (GMC) regarding its regulation of physician associates (PAs) and anaesthetist associates (AAs).
The group claims the current regulations blur the lines between doctors and associate professions. They are seeking “clear and enforceable guidance” from the GMC that defines the scope of practice for PAs and AAs, ensuring a clear distinction between their roles and those of doctors.
The legal challenge was met with significant support. A fundraiser launched to cover initial legal costs quickly surpassed its £15,000 target. Anaesthetists United has now set a new goal of £100,000 to provide “solid footing” throughout the legal proceedings.
In a recent update, the group expressed gratitude for the overwhelming support and announced they are prepared to instruct their legal team to begin work on the case.
Beyond defining the scope of practice for associates, Anaesthetists United also seeks a revision of the current Good Medical Practice guidance. They propose separate guidance documents for doctors and associates, and an end to the use of the term “medical professional” to describe both groups, arguing it creates misleading ambiguity.
The group argues that the GMC’s approach creates confusion between doctors and these associate roles. They believe this lack of clarity could compromise patient safety.
“Patients deserve better,” Anaesthetists United said in a statement. “They should be cared for by doctors when necessary, and know who is and is not a doctor.”
The group claims the GMC has not adequately addressed their concerns. After raising their issues in March, they felt “the only route left open to us is a legal one.”
Anaesthetists United has enlisted legal expertise, including a solicitor specializing in regulatory frameworks and a King’s Counsel.
The GMC responded by acknowledging the legal challenge and stating they “continue to listen to all views” from relevant parties.