Dental Technician’s Struggle with CPD Requirements

UK: A dental technician, Simon Barrington, has voiced strong criticism against the General Dental Council (GDC) for its handling of his case after he fell short on his Continuing Professional Development (CPD) requirements due to being diagnosed with a brain tumour. This incident has raised concerns within the dental profession, with growing scrutiny over cases of GDC members being struck off the register.

Brain Tumour Diagnosis and CPD Changes

Two years ago, Simon Barrington was diagnosed with a brain tumour while working as a dental technician. Following significant neurosurgery to remove the tumour, he faced challenges in his recovery, leaving him unable to speak initially. Despite these difficulties, Simon began working for one to two hours per day as soon as his health permitted, which played a crucial role in aiding his recovery.

However, during this period, CPD requirements changed from 50 hours over five years to 10 hours each year. Simon said he was unaware of this change and was unable to meet the new requirement within that year, resulting in his removal from the GDC register.

‘I did ring them and ask if I could have an extension because of my medical situation but was told “no”,’ Barrington said. ‘I asked what the best way forward was and was told I would have to wait until I had been erased from the register then have to reapply for my registration.’

However, citing the pressures of recovery, the technician said that he did not reapply.

‘Considering what I had just been through, I didn’t want the hassle of having to reapply,’ he added. ‘I was still struggling in recovery and hoping I had no tumour left.’

Frustration with GDC’s Approach

Simon expressed frustration with the GDC’s handling of his case, stating that he had requested an extension due to his medical situation but was denied. The GDC informed him that he would have to wait until he was erased from the register before reapplying for his registration. Owing to the pressures of his recovery, Simon did not reapply.

He believes that the GDC should have shown more consideration for the extenuating circumstances surrounding his case and treated it as unique.

“It would be lovely to see them treating individual’s cases as unique. I think AI would be more sympathetic,” he added.

Other Dental Technicians Share Similar Frustrations

Simon’s case is not an isolated incident, as other dental technicians have also expressed frustration with what they perceive as the GDC’s rigid application of rules without empathy for personal circumstances. Some dental technicians questioned the GDC’s reluctance to provide support in achieving CPD targets, instead penalising those who are unable to meet them.

While some dental technicians remain supportive of the GDC and emphasise the importance of trusting the governing body’s operations, others believe that a more supportive approach could lead to a significant shift in attitudes toward the GDC’s provision of assistance.

GDC’s Perspective and Appeal Option

In response to the concerns raised, a GDC spokesperson stressed the importance of CPD in ensuring public confidence in dentistry. 

“Continuing professional development (CPD) is a vital part of demonstrating commitment to professionalism and ensuring public confidence in dentistry.

They highlighted that dental professionals can take steps to account for personal circumstances and remain compliant with CPD requirements.

“These include not completing any CPD in a single year, as long as they provide their annual CPD declaration and remain compliant with 10 hours over two consecutive years. Or a dental professional can ask for a grace period to complete their CPD at the end of their five-year CPD cycle.

“Dental professionals who do not meet the minimum CPD requirements or complete the annual declaration may be removed from the register. Before this happens, we let them know that they can appeal the decision. If they are removed from the register, they can apply for restoration straight away.”