Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Politics of Addiction pp 65–88Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Ambiguous Justice: The General Medical Council and Dr Ann Dally

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Science, Technology and Medicine in Modern History ((STMMH))

Abstract

In the 1980s, as co-founder and leader of the Association of Independent Doctors in Addiction (AIDA), Ann Dally spoke out vehemently against the Clinic system. During this time the General Medical Council (GMC) brought two disciplinary cases against her. The process of these cases shaped the role of AIDA in the public-private debate and revealed much about the GMC and the regulation of addiction treatment in the 1980s. Their outcomes affected private prescribers’ leadership and their representation in the policy community for years to come. Commentators then and since have asked whether there was a connection between Dally’s outspoken criticisms and the Council’s actions.1 Were they attempts to silence a dissenting voice or had Dr Dally’s care fallen below a recognised standard? What do these cases tell us about medical self-regulation at this time?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. For example, M. Ashton, ‘Doctors at war’, Druglink, 1, 1 (1986), 13–15

    Google Scholar 

  2. and A. Mold, Heroin. The Treatment of Addiction in Twentieth-Century Britain (DeKalb, IL: Northern Illinois University Press, 2008), pp. 97–103.

    Google Scholar 

  3. For example, D. Brahams, ‘“Serious Professional Misconduct” in Relation to Private Treatment of Drug Dependence’, The Lancet, i (1987), 340–341, p. 341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. R. G. Smith, Medical Discipline. The Professional Conduct Jurisdiction of the General Medical Council, 1858–1990 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. Stacey (1992) Regulating British Medicine: the General Medical Council (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 1992), p. 173.

    Google Scholar 

  6. H. B. Spear (and ed. J. Mott), Heroin Addiction Care and Control: The ‘British System’ 1916–1984 (London: DrugScope, 2002), p. 64.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Stacey, ‘The General Medical Council and Professional Self-Regulation’, in D. Gladstone (ed.), Regulating Doctors (London: Institute for the Study of Civil Society, 2000), pp. 28–39.

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. Hawks, ‘The dimensions of drug dependence in the United Kingdom’, in G. Edwards, M. A. H. Russell, D. Hawks et al. (eds.), Drugs and Drug Dependence (Farnborough: Saxon House and Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1976), pp. 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Interdepartmental Committee on Drug Addiction, The Second Report of the Interdepartmental Committee (London: HMSO, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  10. A. Dally, A Doctor’s Story (London: Macmillan, 1990), p. 113.

    Google Scholar 

  11. House of Commons Social Services Committee, Fourth Report: Misuse of Drugs with Special Reference to the Treatment and Rehabilitation of Misusers of Hard Drugs, Session 1984–1985 (London: HMSO, 1985), pp. 67–68.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Medical Working Group on Drug Dependence, Guidelines of Good clinical Practice in the Treatment of Drug Misuse (London: DHSS, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  13. S. Anderson, ‘Health professionals and health care systems: the role of the state in the development of community pharmacy in Great Britain 1900 to 1990’, National Health Policies in Context Workshop (Bergen, Norway, 27–28th March 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  14. AIDA, ‘Management of Addiction’, [flier announcing formation of AIDA] (November 1981), File PP/DAL/B/4/1/1/2, Wellcome Library, London.

    Google Scholar 

  15. For example, AIDA, ‘Drug Addiction: Guidelines and Standards in Management’, Pre-publication edition. (February 1982). File PP/DAL/B/4/1/1/5, Wellcome Library, London.

    Google Scholar 

  16. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Two (6th July 1983), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 2 and 53.

    Google Scholar 

  17. AIDA, ‘Drug Addiction: Guidelines and Standards in Management’, Pre-publication edition (February 1982). File PP/DAL/B/4/1/1/5, Wellcome Library, London.

    Google Scholar 

  18. AIDA, ‘Drug Addiction: Guidelines and Standards in Management’, Pre-publication edition (February 1982). File PP/DAL/B/4/1/1/5, Wellcome Library, London.

    Google Scholar 

  19. AIDA, ‘Comments on: Department of Health and Social Security: Treatment and Rehabilitation (HMSO. 1982). Report of the ACMD’ (January 1983), File PP/DAL/B/4/1/1/7, Wellcome Library, London, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  20. A. Dally, A Doctor’s Story (London: Macmillan, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  21. T. H. Bewley, ‘Prescribing psychoactive drugs to addicts’, British Medical Journal, 281 (1980), 497–498, p. 497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. The Lancet, ‘Drug addiction: British System failing’, The Lancet, 1 (1982) 83–84, p. 83.

    Google Scholar 

  23. ACMD, Treatment and Rehabilitation, DHSS (London: HMSO, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. H. Ghodse, ‘Treatment of drug addiction in London’, The Lancet, 1 (1983), 636–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. A. Dally, ‘Drug clinics today’, The Lancet, 1 (1983), 826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. T. Bewley and A. H. Ghodse, ‘Unacceptable face of private practice: prescription of controlled drugs to addicts’, British Medical Journal, 286 (1983), 1876–1877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Interdepartmental Committee on Drug Addiction, The Second Report of the Interdepartmental Committee (London: HMSO, 1965), p. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  28. H. B. Spear, ‘The early years of the “British System” in practice’, in J. Strang and M. Gossop (eds.), Heroin Addiction And Drug Policy: The British System (Oxford; New York; Tokyo: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 3–28.

    Google Scholar 

  29. P. Dally, ‘Unacceptable face of private practice: prescription of controlled drugs to addicts’, [letter], British Medical Journal, 287 (1983), 500;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. H. D. Beckett, ‘Prescription of controlled drugs to addicts’ [letter], British Medical Journal, 287 (1983), 127;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. E. Stungo, ‘Prescription of controlled drugs to addicts’ [letter], British Medical Journal, 287 (1983), 126–127;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. R. Hartnoll and R. Lewis, ‘Unacceptable face of private practice: prescription of controlled drugs to addicts’, [letter], British Medical Journal, 287 (1983), 500;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. A. B. Robertson, ‘Prescription of controlled drugs to addicts’ [letter], British Medical Journal, 287 (1983), 126.

    Google Scholar 

  34. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day One (5th July 1983), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  35. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Two (6th July 1983), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 2 and 30.

    Google Scholar 

  36. For example, M. Ashton, ‘Doctors at war’, Druglink, 1 (1986), 13–15;

    Google Scholar 

  37. J. Laurance and A. Dally, ‘Racketeer or rescuer?’, New Society, 1256 (1987), 18–19; Anonymous, ‘Heroin on the NHS’, New Society, 1269 (1987), 3; Panorama, BBC1 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  38. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day One (9th December 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 1/71–1/72.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Privy Council, Appeal No.7 of 1987, Ann Gwendolen Dally v. The General Medical Council, Judgment of the Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, Delivered the 14th September 1987, pp. 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  40. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee. Day Two (10th December 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 2/7.

    Google Scholar 

  41. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Two (6th July 1983), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 2/55–2/56.

    Google Scholar 

  42. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Two (6th July 1983), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 2/61–2/63.

    Google Scholar 

  43. M. O’Donnell, ‘One man’s burden’, British Medical Journal, 294 (1987), 451.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Memorandum from the General Medical Council, House of Commons Social Services Committee, Fourth Report: Misuse of Drugs with Special Reference to the Treatment and Rehabilitation of Misusers of Hard Drugs, Session 1984–85 (London: HMSO, 1985), p. 67.

    Google Scholar 

  45. D. Brahams, ‘“Serious Professional Misconduct” in Relation to Private Treatment of Drug Dependence’, The Lancet, i, (1987), 340–341, p. 341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day One (9th December 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 1/12.

    Google Scholar 

  47. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Three (11th December 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 3/56–3/58.

    Google Scholar 

  48. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day One (9th December 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 1/50–1/59.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Thomson Directories, Ltd, London Classified Trades and Professions, Telephone Directory 1968 (London: General Post Office, 1968), p. 940.

    Google Scholar 

  50. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Four (9th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 16–18.

    Google Scholar 

  51. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Five (10th March 1984) Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 88–90.

    Google Scholar 

  52. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee. Day One (6th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London. unnumbered page, preceding, p. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  53. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Four (9th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 1–79.

    Google Scholar 

  54. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Five (10th March 1984) Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  55. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Two (7th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  56. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Four (9th March 1984) Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 27.

    Google Scholar 

  57. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Five (10th March 1984) Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 85.

    Google Scholar 

  58. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Two (6th July 1983) Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 2/82–2/83.

    Google Scholar 

  59. D. Brahams, ‘No right of appeal against GMC finding of serious professional misconduct without suspension or erasure’, The Lancet, 2 (1983), 979–981, p. 979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Five (10th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 87.

    Google Scholar 

  61. GMC. Professional Conduct Committee. Day Four (9th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  62. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee (4th July 1988) Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen (Resumed case) T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 48.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Medical Working Group on Drug Dependence, Guidelines of Good Practice in the Treatment of Drug Misuse (London: DHSS, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  64. GMC, Professional Conduct and Discipline: Fitness to Practice, edition 61 (London, GMC, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  65. P. H. Connell and M. Mitcheson, ‘Necessary safeguards when prescribing opioid drugs to addicts: experience of drug dependence clinics in London’, British Medical Journal, 288 (1984), 767–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Three (8th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 54.

    Google Scholar 

  67. GMC. Professional Conduct Committee. Day One, Tuesday 6th March 1984, Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 1/1.

    Google Scholar 

  68. For example, J. Strang, ‘Personal View’, British Medical Journal, 284 (1982), 972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. G. V. Stimson and R. Lart, ‘The Relationship Between the State and Local Practice in the Development of National Policy on Drugs between 1920 and 1990’, in J. Strang and M. Gossop (eds.), Heroin Addiction And Drug Policy: The British System (Oxford, New York, Tokyo: Oxford University Press, 1994), pp. 331–341, p. 336.

    Google Scholar 

  70. For example, J. Ritchie, ‘Drug crazy Britain’, The Sun, London (17th December 1980), 14–15.

    Google Scholar 

  71. For example, The Lancet, ‘Drug dependence in Britain: a critical time’, The Lancet, 2 (1983), 493–494; The Lancet, ‘Drug addiction: British System failing’, The Lancet, 1 (1982), 83–84;

    Google Scholar 

  72. M. Honigsbaum, ‘The addiction arguments that divide the doctors’, Hampstead and Highgate Express, (6th May 1983), 2; Anonymous, ‘Doctor Death’, The Listener (29th July 1982), 22.

    Google Scholar 

  73. See J. Merritt, ‘Doctors who trade in misery’, Dally Mirror, (18th February 1982), 7–8;

    Google Scholar 

  74. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Three (8th March 1984), Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London. pp. 39–85;

    Google Scholar 

  75. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Four (9th March 1984) Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London. pp. 11–12 and 34–39;

    Google Scholar 

  76. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day Five (10th March 1984) Case of Tarnesby, Herman Peter, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, pp. 13–19 and 48–51.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Medical Working Group on Drug Dependence, Guidelines of Good Practice in the Treatment of Drug Misuse (London: DHSS, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  78. M. O’Donnell, ‘One man’s burden’, British Medical Journal, 287 (1983), 990.

    Google Scholar 

  79. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day One (9th December, 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T A Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 1/21.

    Google Scholar 

  80. M. Ashton, ‘Doctors at War’, Druglink, 1(2) (1986), 14–16.

    Google Scholar 

  81. R. Baker, ‘British and American Conceptions of Medical Ethics, 1847–1947’, Anglo-American Medical Relations: Historical Insights Conference, 19th–21st June 2003, The Wellcome Building, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  82. D. Porter and R. Porter, Patient’s Progress: Doctors and Doctoring in Eighteenth Century England (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  83. GMC, Professional Conduct Committee, Day One (9th December 1986), Case of Dally, Ann Gwendolen, T. A. Reed & Co. [transcript], GMC Archive, London, p. 1/47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Heroin Price and Purity Outcomes Study, University of San Francisco, California, USA

    Sarah G. Mars (Qualitative Project Director, and Honorary Research Fellow)

  2. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK

    Sarah G. Mars (Qualitative Project Director, and Honorary Research Fellow)

Authors
  1. Sarah G. Mars
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2012 Sarah G. Mars

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mars, S.G. (2012). Ambiguous Justice: The General Medical Council and Dr Ann Dally. In: The Politics of Addiction. Science, Technology and Medicine in Modern History. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137272218_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137272218_5

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-30688-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-27221-8

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation