Medical professionals' association sues the government due to disputes concerning proposed job duty alterations
In a significant development, the United Medical Associate Professionals (UMAPs) have formally notified the Government and NHS England of their intention to pursue a judicial review, challenging the implementation of the Leng Review’s recommendations regarding Physician Associates (PAs) in the NHS.
The judicial review, which is currently at the pre-action stage, centres around concerns about the impact of the reforms on the PA profession and NHS service delivery. UMAPs alleges that the Government failed to properly consult the recognized union before implementing these changes, did not conduct a proper cost-benefit analysis of the impact on NHS delivery, and claims bias in the review aimed more at addressing doctors’ grievances rather than PA safety.
The review, chaired by Professor Gillian Leng, recommended that PAs should be banned from seeing patients who have not been reviewed by a medic to prevent the risk of "catastrophic" misdiagnoses. However, UMAPs argues that this recommendation could undermine a vital part of the clinical workforce, potentially leading to increased NHS backlogs and strains on the healthcare system.
The Government, represented by the Department of Health and Social Care, maintains that the review and its implementation prioritizes patient safety and quality of care. They emphasize Professor Leng’s expertise and comprehensive report, which found that PAs have been used as substitutes for doctors despite having significantly less training.
The health secretary has agreed to implement the recommendations of Leng’s report in full, prioritizing safety and reassuring patients that they will be seen and diagnosed by a qualified doctor. However, UMAPs argue that this could lead to Employers struggling to manage patient loads due to PAs and AAs not being allowed to carry out jobs they are trained to do.
The judicial review challenges the Government’s decision to accept all of the Leng Review’s recommendations, which significantly restrict the roles and titles of PAs and Anaesthesia Associates (AAs), including proposals that PAs be renamed ‘assistants’, PAs should not see undifferentiated patients without prior review by a qualified doctor, and PAs require at least two years’ secondary care training before working in primary care.
The case comes after the tragic death of Emily Chesterton, a 30-year-old woman who died from a pulmonary embolism after being misdiagnosed by a PA on two occasions and told she had anxiety. This incident has raised concerns about the role of PAs in the NHS and the need for proper training and oversight to prevent similar tragedies from occurring.
As of late July 2025, the judicial review claim is at the pre-action stage, with formal legal proceedings anticipated if the Government does not reconsider or adequately respond to UMAPs’ concerns. The Government has until August 1 to indicate whether or not it will reconsider its decision.
References: [1] BBC News (2025). UMAPs to challenge government over PA changes. [online] Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58017565 [2] The Guardian (2025). UMAPs threaten legal action over PA changes. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jul/28/umaps-threaten-legal-action-over-pa-changes [3] Pulse Today (2025). UMAPs to challenge government over PA changes. [online] Available at: https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/umaps-to-challenge-government-over-pa-changes/20040929.article
- The UMAPs' judicial review, centered around concerns about the impact of the Leng Review's recommendations on medical-conditions, health-and-wellness, and the broader healthcare system, is set to challenge the Government's decision to restrict the roles of Physician Associates (PAs) and Anaesthesia Associates (AAs) in the NHS.
- The pre-action stage judicial review claims that the Government's implementation of the Leng Review's recommendations, including banning PAs from seeing patients without a medic's review and the proposal to rename PAs as 'assistants', could undermine insurance coverage and general-news discussions about the adequacy of medical care in the NHS.
- The ongoing legal proceedings, as revealed by news sources such as BBC News, The Guardian, and Pulse Today, question the Government's decision to prioritize patient safety over the profession's concerns about the potential negative effects on the PA profession, science, and politics in the realm of healthcare.
