§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of Stale for Social Services how many appeals against decisions of family practitioner committees that complaints should not be investigated because of a failure to give notice in time, have been referred to him 477W in each of the past five years; and what proportion of appeals was successful.
§ Mr. MoyleProvision for these appeals was made for the first time in April 1974. The numbers since then are as follows:
Number of appeals Number successful Percentage 1974 … 13 1 8 1975 … 42 9 21 1976 … 55 6 11 1977 … 53 11 21
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 Total Doctors Number of complaints investigated 508 434 545 587 596 2,670 Number of complaints substantiated* 98 65 92 81 85 421 Percentage of complaints substantiated 19.3 15.0 16.9 13.8 14.3 15.8 Ophthalmic Medical Practitioners and Opticians† Number of complaints investigated 4 10 6 20 14 54 Number of complaints substantiated* 2 5 1 11 6 25 Percentage of complaints substantiated 50.0 50.0 16.7 55.0 42.9 46.3 Chemists Number of complaints investigated 60 38 40 52 58 248 Number of complaints substantiated* 40 29 27 42 52 190 Percentage of complaints substantiated 66.7 76.3 67.5 80.8 89.7 76.5 Dentists Number of complaints investigated 252 236 272 266 277 1,303 Number of complaints substantiated* 112 125 125 144 130 636 Percentage of complaints substantiated 44.4 53.0 45.9 54.1 46.9 48.8 Total Number of complaints investigated 824 718 863 925 945 4,275 Number of complaints substantiated* 252 224 245 278 273 1,272 Percentage of complaints substantiated 30.6 31.0 28.4 30.0 28.9 29.8 * By finding that there had been a breach of the terms of service. † The figures for ophthalmic medical practitioners and opticians have been grouped together because separate statistics are not maintained.
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) if he has received any representation about the limitation of time during which a complaint can be made to a family practioner committee;
(2) for how long a complaint to the family practitioner committee has had to be lodged within eight weeks of the event which gave rise to it;
(3) what steps have been taken by his Department to ensure that patients are aware of the complaints procedure to family practitioner committees, and of the time limit.
§ Mr. MoyleThe Department initiated in September 1976 a general review of the complaints investigation procedures for the family practitioner services. A consultation paper listing proposals which have been made over a number of years for changing the procedures, including those mentioned by my hon. Friend, was circulated to all interested organisations. Comments have been received from over 180 bodies. I am considering these com-
478W
§ Mr. Ashleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services how many complaints have been investigated by family practitioner committees for the last five years against (a) doctors, (b) ophthalmic medical practitioners, (c) chemists, (d) opticians and (e) dentists; and what proportion in each category was successful.
§ Mr. MoyleThe information is as follows:
ments, and until my right hon. Friend and I have completed our study I cannot say what changes we propose to make.
The time limit for making a complaint to the family practitioner committee was increased to eight weeks on 1st April 1974. Prior to that date the time limit was six weeks. A complaint which is made out of time may still be investigated if the committees' service committees are satisfied that the delay was the result of illness or other reasonable cause and the consent of the practitioner, or failing that of my right hon. Friend, to the investigation is obtained.
The medical card which is issued to every National Health Service patient sets out the complaints procedure, including the time limits.