Today’s Guardian reports that Professor Leng’s review of Physician Associates (PAs) will recommend that they are renamed to something less confusing for patients.

And they will also be required to tell patients, explicitly, that they are not doctors. 

This is impressive. She has clearly taken her work forward with a sense of urgency.

Marion and Brendan Chesterton have already told us they are “over the moon” – these were two key points that they made to Professor Leng when they met her.

But does this make our legal challenge redundant?

Absolutely not.

“I am not a doctor”

It remains a mystery why the GMC has stubbornly refused to compel PAs to say “I am not a doctor” when they introduce themselves to patients (as they do for medical students). The BMA’s barrister, Jenni Richards KC, raised this key point in court. Without a clear unambiguous message, patients cannot give proper consent to treatment by an associate.

If we win in court, the GMC will need to think again. It will have to properly address issues of patient safety, public confidence in the medical profession and risk – and it will have to do it straight away, not at some point in the future.

Setting scope “is not for us”

Even more urgent is that the GMC needs to give up their absurd stance that setting scope of practice  – which defines what PAs can and cannot do – is not for them to manage. 

When we started this action they tried to argue they didn’t have the legal power to issue any restrictions. Now it seems they do have the power; but they are earnestly claiming that every single person in their organisation spontaneously decided that they just shouldn’t set scope.  Even those of them with an interest in patient safety.  

Nor will they even empower the Royal Colleges, some of which have produced sensible guidance. The GMC seems content to let that be undermined by cash-strapped employers so that waiting lists can be brought down.

The same applies to doctors’ supervision of associates, which is currently mired in uncertainty because of the GMC’s ‘ephemeral-touch’ regulatory approach. 

And so we’re back in court

For these reasons and more, a legal case remains pressing and important. We will be back in the High Court, next Monday 9 June fighting hard for safe and lawful regulation of associates. Professor Leng’s review and report will be very important too. But at best it will complement our case and make recommendations. Our case insists on change now.

Bringing the GMC to court is expensive. We are grateful for all the donations we have received. But we need more. Thank you for helping us.