The BMA today begins its legal case against the GMC in a hearing at the High Court in London. The Association is accusing the medical regulator of abandoning its responsibilities to patients’ safety by blurring the lines between doctors and non-doctors.  

The BMA is also challenging the GMC over its use of the term “medical professionals”, which the Association says should be used only to refer to qualified doctors. 

The GMC has been using the term in its guidance to describe all of those it now regulates – both doctors and physician and anaesthesia associates (PAs and AAs). 

Lawyers for the BMA will argue that the GMC’s approach is unlawful, undermining its statutory functions and objectives as a regulator of health professionals and contravening requirements imposed on it by legislation. 

They will argue that PAs and AAs are neither doctors nor medically qualified, with the distinction crucial to patient safety. With widespread evidence of confusion in the public as to the roles of associates, they will argue that a refusal to make a clear distinction between associates and doctors will undermine public confidence in the NHS. 

Professor Phil Banfield, BMA chair of council, said: 

"The description of Physician and Anaesthesia Associates as ‘medical professionals’ is not a semantic disagreement we have with the GMC. It goes to the core of its failure as a regulator. Its job is to reassure the public that there is a clear difference between who is and who is not a doctor. Now that it is a regulator both of doctors and non-doctors, that job has become even more crucial, and its failure to distinguish between them even less forgivable. 

"Put simply, associates are not medical professionals. Doctors are. The NHS is a complex enough system as it is and if the GMC’s regulatory approach is to further confuse patients by blurring the lines between the two, it only undermines public confidence in the healthcare they receive. 

"It should not need a court to make the GMC to do the right thing, listen to the medical profession, and put patients first. It should not have required us to bring this case, and it is galling to see tax-payer’s money being spent on defending the GMC’s confusing position which we hold to be flawed and unsafe. Doctors will continue to advocate for and on behalf of our patients’ safety.   

"There is currently an ongoing government review into the safety of the PA and AA roles while evidence of patient harms mounts. The GMC should be taking stock of the situation and concluding that instead of defending the indefensible it should concentrate on giving patients the reassurance that they are being treated by a doctor, with all the training and skill that go with that title."

Notes to editors

• The hearing is taking place on 12th and 13th February 2025 at the Royal Courts of Justice on the Strand in London.  

• The Anaesthetists United case against the GMC, which includes the parents of Emily Chesterton as claimants, focuses on the failure to produce a scope of practice for associates. It is expected to be heard in May.  

• The BMA considers that case to be complementary to its own, and is providing financial support via an indemnity.  

The BMA is a professional association and trade union representing and negotiating on behalf of all doctors in the UK. A leading voice advocating for outstanding health care and a healthy population. An association providing members with excellent individual services and support throughout their lives.

​