Skip to main content

Text Size:

Text Size:

Chiropractor Login
Find a Chiropractor

By law all complaints received by the GCC must be considered by an Investigating Committee (consisting of both lay and registered members). Their role is not to decide on the details of the case, but decide whether there is a case to answer:

Would the conduct (if proven) be unacceptable professional conduct?

  • Is there enough evidence to make a case?
  • Is it in the public interest to consider the case?
  • Where they find a case to answer, it is put forward to a full hearing of the Professional Conduct Committee (around 12 cases a year).

While the majority of IC cases are closed with no further action without comment, occasionally the IC will find there is no case to answer, but nevertheless use the opportunity to provide advice to the registrant. This advice will not be recorded on the public register, as it is not a formal sanction, but the fact that advice was issued may be called upon if another complaint is made against the same registrant.

Background to the case

A member of the public made a complaint alleging that a chiropractor’s social media profile suggested they were a medical doctor or held a PhD.

The name on the account was “Dr [Name]”, and was usually accompanied on the platform by the username “@[Name]DC”.

The chiropractor had wrongly understood that the inclusion of “DC” in the username could be a permissible “qualification” of the Dr title.

The standards in this regard are clearly set out in the GCC advertising guidance available to chiropractors, as well as the guidance on the ASA website, and extend to informal sites such as social media platforms as well as to formal advertising on professional websites.

Investigating Committee Finding

The Committee considered that inappropriate use of the courtesy title “Dr” has the potential to mislead members of the public about the qualifications held by chiropractors, undermining confidence in the profession and bringing it into disrepute.

However, the Committee noted that the chiropractor responded immediately when the GCC raised the complaint with him. He had apologised, expressed remorse and had taken immediate action to suspend the account while he made himself aware of the relevant guidance. He had amended the content of his account before reinstating it, and taken care to ensure that the content was compliant with guidance and required standards.

The Committee found there was no case to answer in respect of unacceptable professional conduct. They did, however, use their discretionary power to provide advice to the registrant. This advice will not be recorded on the public register, as it is not a formal sanction, but the fact that advice was issued may be called upon if another complaint is made against the same registrant.

Learning

The GCC guidance is clear that, if you use the courtesy title ‘Doctor’ or ‘Dr’, you must make clear within all public domain text that you are not a registered medical practitioner, but a ‘Doctor of Chiropractic’. The ASA recommend that this clarification is made within the same statement. Failure to do so may lead to you being the subject of complaints or an investigation by the ASA and/or the GCC.

It can be particularly difficult to provide the clarifications required within the minimal character-count afforded by a social media username, name field or biography – but the lack of space does not mean that the requirement does not apply. It may be tempting to rely on “DC” as the clarification, but in guidance originally issued in 2018, and updated in August 2024, the ASA specifically highlight that the public will not recognise “DC” as meaning “Doctor of Chiropractic” so:

Dr [Name] DC

is not considered sufficiently clear to distinguish a chiropractor from a medical doctor.

Further Reading

From the General Chiropractic Council:

From the Advertising Standards Authority: