Receiving a notification from the General Optical Council (GOC) regarding a fitness to practise investigation (FTP) is a moment many optometrists fear.
In the period from 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, the GOC received 464 concerns. Of these, around 29% progressed to an FTP investigation.
Over the entirety of 2024 and 2025, the AOP opened 282 GOC matters to provide support to members.
Speaking to OT about the FTP process, an AOP member, who has chosen to remain anonymous, recalled the shock and devastation she felt on receiving notification of the case against her, and described the impact that nearly a year under investigation had on her.
The test
“A parent had returned to the practice as they were not happy with their child’s glasses as they felt they were too strong.
“I don’t remember the test itself, apart from the child being uncooperative, so I got some information to support the test, but not everything I would have liked. I can see from my notes that I had written down the basics that I needed to fill in. I had intended to go back to add the detail but unfortunately had not.
“During the sight test, I found a slightly stronger prescription than previously, but was worried that the child would not be able to adapt as they weren’t wearing their current glasses. I had suggested we try to incentivise them to wear their glasses, and to return in six months.
Receiving a notification from the GOC
“I received notification from the GOC in December 2024 that an FTP case had been opened against me. The complainant said they did not feel that I listened to their concerns.
“When I first received the notification about the case against me it was devastating. I had always felt that if a patient can see you care and that you are doing your best, they would not raise concerns with the GOC. It was a shock to the system. I had been that optometrist staying behind, running into the cleaners on a regular basis because I was finishing my notes, sending referrals, and calling people back. I went above and beyond and I thought that meant this would never happen to me.
“I immediately called the AOP and they put me in contact with a solicitor on their team, and later a clinical adviser. The AOP has been helpful all the way through. I could message at any time if I needed to. The AOP solicitor did their best to try to make it as easy as possible and to be reassuring without making promises. Work was very supportive with the time I needed too.
My initial reaction was to curl up into the foetal position. I went through the motions, doing what was asked of me and sending all of the information that was required
Overwhelm and worry
“My initial reaction was to curl up into the foetal position. I went through the motions, doing what was asked of me and sending all of the information that was required. That period was overwhelming because I was still coming to terms with what had happened and there is so much to do. The director of the company commented on the change in my personality. I was quite down.
“I was the sole breadwinner at the time. I was doing the odd locum day to help cover the bills, which my employer was aware of. It was a huge worry initially. I thought: when I tell the locum company there is an investigation, will they stop giving me work? How would I pay the bills?
“You feel like you need to protect yourself. Then you realise it’s not doing you any good, mentally or emotionally. Eventually I uncurled from that foetal position to try to be my old self again. I started to do things for others and get out in the world a bit more.
“That helped me put things into perspective and realise that this doesn’t mean you’re a bad optometrist. It does mean you made some mistakes and you could have done better in some cases. There are some things in your control, and others outside of it. You can feel you have communicated that a patient should come back to the practice if they have any issues, but you can’t control how that comes across to the other person.
“I received a lot of advice from the solicitor at the AOP. From the outset, he recommended completing continuing professional development courses on children’s eye tests and binocular vision. That helped reassure me to some degree, and allowed me to see where I could have done things better. It wasn’t that the issue was my decision – it’s a bit like maths – it was my workings out. I should have done a cycloplegic exam and that way I would have covered all bases.
It is a lot to have hanging over your head for that length of time. You learn to cope with it because you just can’t stay in that emotion for a year
The long wait
“When I first got in contact with the solicitor from the AOP, he said the process was probably going to take a year, which was a massive shock. In the end, it was just short of a year. That was just the preliminary decision – if we had challenged the decision then I guess it would have taken longer.
“It is a lot to have hanging over your head for that length of time. You learn to cope with it because you just can’t stay in that emotion for a year. You have to put it aside during the lulls in the case and try to get on with things but it is horrible.
“Mine was fairly straightforward – they just needed to look at the case, evidence, and statements from myself and representations put forward by the solicitor taking into account the clinical adviser’s opinion. There are other cases that have a lot more information and go to a tribunal. I can imagine it could take years.
“In the end, the process was just a week or two short of a year. The GOC result was to close the case. It won’t be on any public record, but the GOC will be aware and said that if they were to receive a similar complaint within four years, they would take it very seriously.
The thing I would want to impress on people who haven’t been through the process is that it is really hard going through it for such a prolonged time
Worth the investment
“The thing that I feel could do with changing the most is the GOC to have better funding so that the process can happen more quickly. We now live in a more litigious society, so it feels like the resources need to increase. People who have been through the process would probably understand an increase in their fees because they would rather have had this last six months, not a year.
“When you are going through it, the hardest thing was the period of waiting and trying to put it out of your mind. Sometimes you achieve it. Most of the time you failed. Every time you thought you had put it out of your mind, you might get an email mentioning the GOC – nothing important – but it would set your heart racing. It was always just under the surface.
“Going through that for a whole year is horrible. The thing I would want to impress on people who haven’t been through the process is that it is really hard going through it for such a prolonged time. Carrying it for such a long time really takes it out of you. It is worth us putting more money into the AOP and the GOC for it all to run more quickly and smoothly.”
Common misconceptions of the FTP process
Scott Shadbolt, head of professional discipline at the AOP and who was the solicitor supporting the member in this matter, told OT that it is a common misconception that a matter being referred to a regulator automatically results in an investigation being opened.
In fact, the GOC’s FTP report for 2024–2025 indicates that of the 464 concerns raised during the period, 137 were progressed to a case or investigation.
Once an investigation has been opened, the Council conduct an initial investigation. The average time period for an investigation to be completed is 39 weeks, although this can vary.
Shadbolt said: “We typically advise members who are subject to an investigation to expect the initial investigation to be completed within 12 to 18 months. If a matter is referred to a hearing at the end of the initial investigation, a further 12-month period can be expected before a matter is concluded. It is not clear why investigations take as long as they do, and the Council do not provide any detailed reasoning for this, especially on a case-by-case basis. It is a matter that has been raised with the Council by the AOP and a point which we will continue to closely monitor.”
At the end of an investigation, a matter is referred to the case examiners for a decision. This can see the matter being closed, either with no action or with a warning, or referred to the FTP committee.
A year in Fitness to Practise data
464
concerns raised with the GOC
29%
conversion rate from concern to investigation
25%
increase in median age for open investigations
34%
increase median time to a case examiner decision
137
progressed to an FTP case or investigation
Source: The GOC’s Fitness to Practise report (1 April 2024–31 March 2025)
Providing context behind the data
The GOC told OT that the number of concerns raised during the 2024–25 period fall within expected year-on-year levels and is broadly consistent with historic trends.
Commenting on the 369 cases that were closed at triage, the GOC told OT: “This reflects the GOC’s role as a risk-based regulator, ensuring concerns are assessed proportionately and only progressed when there is a realistic risk to public protection.”
Many concerns do not meet the GOC’s acceptance criteria or statutory threshold for fitness to practise action. The regulator said that these can instead be resolved through early closure, signposting, or informal advice.
According to the GOC’s data, the median age for open investigations increased 25% from 31 weeks in 2023–24 to 29 weeks in 2024–25, while the median time to a case examiner decision rose by 34% from 41 weeks to 55 weeks.
The GOC’s report for the last period noted a decision to progress older and more complex investigations through the system.
A spokesperson for the GOC told OT: “The decision to prioritise older and more complex cases was driven by recognition that prolonged investigations can have a significant impact on all parties involved – including complainants, registrants, and witnesses.”
The regulator said: “While prioritising older and more complex cases required additional resource and attention, it was a necessary and deliberate trade-off. In the short-term, this approach may have placed pressure on timeliness in other parts of the system. However, in the medium to long-term, it has reduced systemic delays, improved case flow, and strengthened overall performance against our key performance indicators.”
The spokesperson added that addressing older cases reduces the risk of cases becoming increasingly complex or resource-intensive over time.
In 2026, the GOC is focusing on maintaining early and proportionate decision-making at triage, improving forward planning and capacity management, strengthening quality and consistency of decision making, reducing rework or delays later in the process, and continuing targeted work on complex or higher-risk cases to prevent new backlogs.
The GOC said this is supported by ongoing process review, clearer guidance for decision-makers, and closer monitoring of case progression data.
Several measures are in place to reduce the time a case takes to progress, the GOC said, including a “robust” triage process, early risk assessment to allow higher-risk cases to be prioritised, clear decision-making guidance to support consistent and timely outcomes, and active case management and milestone tracking throughout the process.
The measures have helped to reduce unnecessary investigations, improve early resolution, and ensure resources are focused where they have the greatest impact on public protection, the GOC said, contributing to a more efficient, proportionate, and risk-focused system.
OT asked the GOC what timeframes the regulator aims for cases to progress within. The GOC shared that it operates key performance indicators across each stage of the process. These “reflect the need to balance timeliness with fairness, ensuing decisions are robust, evidence-based and procedurally sound.”
Stage one (triage): up to six weeks
Stage two (investigation and case examiner decision-making): approximately 10 to 22 weeks
Stage three (preparation for the fitness to practise committee): up to 10 weeks
Stage four (preparation for hearings) up to 16 weeks.