https://wiki.movingforward-together.org/w/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Doctor%2F360_feedbackDoctor/360 feedback - Revision history2026-04-15T21:19:09ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.41.0https://wiki.movingforward-together.org/w/index.php?title=Doctor/360_feedback&diff=114&oldid=prevPeteTyerman: new page2025-09-17T07:52:52Z<p>new page</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div><br />
= 360° Feedback, Disability, and Revalidation =<br />
''This page was created to help understanding and confirmed by ChatGPT. It is not legal advice.''<br />
<br />
== Background ==<br />
The GMC requires doctors to collect colleague and patient feedback for revalidation. <br />
<br />
* It does **not** require anonymous 360° feedback. <br />
* Many organisations choose anonymous 360° tools, but this is a local policy choice. <br />
* For disabled doctors, especially those with hidden disabilities, this can cause problems.<br />
<br />
== Risks Under the Equality Act ==<br />
<br />
* '''Indirect discrimination:''' anonymous feedback may disadvantage disabled doctors.<br />
* '''Direct discrimination:''' feedback that criticises disability-related adjustments.<br />
* '''Harassment:''' comments on disability traits.<br />
* '''Burden of proof:''' anonymity makes bias impossible to disprove.<br />
<br />
== Risks for Hidden Disabilities ==<br />
<br />
* Misinterpretation of coping strategies. <br />
* Amplification of unconscious bias. <br />
* No chance to reply or correct misunderstandings.<br />
* Groupthink or collusion in small teams.<br />
* Discourages disclosure of disability.<br />
* Psychological harm from anonymous criticism.<br />
* Conflicts with GMC standards on fairness.<br />
<br />
== Inconsistent Practice ==<br />
Appraisers sometimes insist on anonymous 360° feedback even when the Responsible Officer does not. <br />
<br />
* Legally, responsibility still rests with the Designated Body and RO. - This inconsistency risks unfairness and potential discrimination.<br />
<br />
== Reasonable Adjustments ==<br />
Possible alternatives: - <br />
<br />
* Named feedback instead of anonymous.<br />
* Supervisor reports, case reviews, patient outcome data.<br />
* Training for appraisers on interpreting disability-related adjustments.<br />
* Processes that are supportive, fair, and proportionate.<br />
<br />
== Conclusion ==<br />
- GMC requires feedback, not anonymous 360°. - ROs and Designated Bodies must consider adjustments. - Insisting on anonymous 360° feedback without adjustments risks discrimination.<br />
<br />
''This page was created to help understanding and confirmed by ChatGPT. It is not legal advice.''</div>PeteTyerman