Personal Introduction by Tina McCaffery

My name is Tina McCaffery, and I have been an active part of the aesthetics industry for over twenty years. During this time, I have worn many hats – as a practitioner, teacher, assessor, and Lead IQA. My experience spans across training both medics and non-medics, giving me a unique, first-hand perspective on the industry's evolution and the challenges it currently faces.

Industry Growth and Challenges

The aesthetics industry has experienced exponential growth, transforming into a multi-billion-pound sector that contributes significantly to government revenue. With this rapid expansion, we've seen an influx of practitioners entering the field – many of whom bring innovation and dedication to their craft. However, as with any rapidly growing industry, challenges have emerged, primarily due to:

• Lack  of Regulations and Licensing: There  are no consistent standards or regulatory frameworks to ensure public  safety and professional competency.
• No  Reporting System: Currently, there is  no formal mechanism to report adverse events, complications, or  malpractice, leaving a significant gap in public safety and industry accountability.
• No  Standardized Teaching or Qualifications are required:  Practitioners can attend short, fast-track courses, gaining multiple  certificates within days, and are then able to perform advanced procedures  on the public.
• Qualifications: It’s important to note here that the industry has now brought out regulated      OFQUAL aesthetics qualifications that go up to level 7 and meet all the frameworks required and are constantly evolving and improving as with all  qualifications. These need to be included as a standard that practitioners are required to have before they can actually practice.

This has resulted in a worrying trend: individuals with minimal training are performing high-risk procedures, compromising public safety and the industry's credibility.

Impact on Training and Competency

Over the past five years, I have witnessed the rise of practitioners with very limited experience or knowledge – some with only a few months in the industry – taking quick CPD 'train the trainer' courses. These individuals then go on to train others, perpetuating a cycle of underqualified practitioners. 

Even within the medical community, there is a misconception that having a medical degree equates to competence in aesthetics. In reality, medics and non-medics undergo the same CPD courses for aesthetic procedures, including training on facial anatomy and injection techniques. The absence of standardized qualifications and competency assessments affects everyone, regardless of their medical background.

The Growing Divide: Medics vs. Non-Medics

The industry is now experiencing an increasingly aggressive and volatile divide between medics and non-medics. The narrative, primarily driven by medics, paints non-medics as being entirely responsible for complications and risks, accusing them of lacking even the most basic knowledge and skills. However, the reality is far more complex:

• No  Reporting System, No Data: There is currently no formal reporting system to document      complications, adverse events, or malpractice – whether by medics or non-medics. As a result, accusations and narratives are driven by  anecdotal evidence rather than verified data.
• High  Complication Rates Among Medics:  While medics argue that they are better equipped to handle complications, complications do occur among medics, often at a comparable rate to      non-medics.
• Inconsistent  Media Narrative: The media frequently highlights complications caused by non-medics but fails to report the complications caused by medics.

An example whilst not aesthetics regulated is in the United Kingdom, patient safety incidents within healthcare settings are a significant concern. In the 2021/22 reporting year, there were 12,675 incidents resulting in severe harm or death across England, averaging approximately 35 such incidents daily. 

RINGROSELAW.CO.UK

It's important to note that these figures likely underestimate the true extent of patient harm, as underreporting remains a challenge. A study highlighted that a significant number of patient safety incidents go unreported, suggesting that the actual number of incidents may be higher.

PMC.NCBI.NLM.NIH.GOV

Financially, the impact of medical negligence is substantial. In the 2023/24 period, the NHS in England paid out a record £2.82 billion in settling medical negligence claims, an increase of over £180 million from the previous year. 

MEDICAL-SOLICITORS.COM

These statistics underscore the critical need for continued efforts to enhance patient safety, improve incident reporting mechanisms, and implement preventive measures to reduce harm within the UK's healthcare system.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/dec/12/nhs-spends-147bn-a-year-treating-patients-in-england-hurt-by-care-mistakes-says-report?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nhs-pays-out-record-amount-in-damages-for-mistakes-in-care-v65fhtcdk?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/health/13950087/nhs-record-compensation-cancer-diagnosis/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://blackwaterlaw.co.uk/7-stats-latest-nhs-resolution-figures/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/893770/number-of-claims-reported-to-nhs-england-by-type/

https://www.bmj.com/content/382/bmj.p1688

https://www.medical-solicitors.com/news/nhs-resolution-statistics-2023-24/

The above proves that regardless of training medics make mistakes that cause real harm and cost the Governments and therefore the taxpayer millions in compensation that is regularly paid out due to incompetence medics. But unless the public or media go looking for these actual statistics none of this gets reported by medics or the media?!

Both medics and non-medics are trained in the same aesthetic complication management procedures, yet medics can rely on their professional bodies for protection, while non-medics have no such safety net.

The Case for a Reporting System and Inclusive Regulation

The lack of a reporting system is one of the industry's most significant flaw. This void has allowed misinformation to flourish, perpetuating stereotypes and deepening the divide between medics and non-medics.

A unified, independent reporting system, modelled on the UK’s Yellow Card Scheme, would enable:

• Transparent reporting of adverse events and complications by both medics and non-medics.
• Data-driven analysis to identify trends and high-risk practices.
• Evidence-based policymaking, ensuring regulations are fair, inclusive, and  safety-focused.

I am here today to advocate for the implementation of this reporting system, alongside a comprehensive regulatory framework that is inclusive of both medics and non-medics. This is not just about bridging the divide – it is about ensuring public safety, industry integrity, and professional accountability within beauty and aesthetics.

Conclusion and Call to Action

My experience across all facets of the aesthetics industry has shown me that this is not a fight of medics versus non-medics. It is a fight for public safety, industry standards, and professional integrity. The time has come for us to build a transparent, inclusive, and fair regulatory system that protects the public and upholds the highest standards for all practitioners.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to discussing this further and working together to bring about meaningful, positive change.

About ASRS

The Aesthetic Safety Reporting System (ASRS) is proposed as an independent regulatory body for aesthetics in Scotland, modeled on the UK’s Yellow Card Scheme. The ASRS aims to ensure inclusive oversight of both medics and non-medics and comprehensive safety monitoring for all needle-based procedures.

• No dedicated reporting mechanism for adverse events in aesthetics.
• Professional conflicts between medics and non-medics impacting regulatory clarity.
• Public safety risks due to inconsistent standards of practice.
• Lack of transparency and public trust.

The ASRS should be designed so that it is a centralized digital reporting platform for the aesthetics industry with the following features:
• Anonymous Reporting Option to encourage honest reporting.
• User-Friendly Interface accessible via a website and mobile app.
• Automated Alerts for severe or recurring adverse events.
• Public Database for transparency and practitioner verification.
• Investigative Committees with equal representation of medics and non-medics.

• Needle-Based Procedures: Dermal fillers, anti-wrinkle injections, microneedling, and more.
• Adverse Event Types: Mild reactions, severe reactions, and training & compliance issues.
• Investigative Committees to ensure impartial investigations.
• Collaborative Oversight with HIS and local councils.

• For Practitioners: Transparent and fair reporting mechanism with equal representation.
• For Consumers: Public safety alerts and access to verified practitioner certification.
• For the Government: Centralized data collection enabling evidence-based policymaking.

• Form a Working Group with government representatives, industry stakeholders, and consumer safety advocates.
• Pilot Program: Phased implementation strategy to test the ASRS system in select regions.
• Commitment to Collaboration: Engage in development and implementation phases.

Tina McCaffery

Teacher Assessor and Lead IQA
thetherapyroom8@aol.com Whatsapp 07926 348650