| answer text |
<p>On 24 April 2013, the independent <em>Review of the Regulation of Cosmetic Interventions</em>,
chaired by Sir Bruce Keogh, was published. A copy has already been placed in the Library.</p><p>
</p><p>The <em>Government Response to the Review of the Regulation of Cosmetic Interventions
</em>was published on 13 February. A copy of the response has already been placed
in the Library. We fully accept the principles of the Keogh review and the overwhelming
majority of the recommendations. The response looks to protect the public through
clear standards, better training and robust qualifications, and explores how far supervision
from regulated professionals might support self-regulation of the sector.</p><p> </p><p>Officials
are working with key delivery partners such as the Royal College of Surgeons who have
set up an inter-specialty committee to ensure standards for cosmetic surgery and they
are working with the General Medical Council on a code of ethical conduct. Health
Education England (HEE) is leading on a review of training and qualifications for
providers of non-surgical cosmetic interventions and those required to be responsible
prescribers. On 11 September, HEE published a phase 1 report <em>Review of qualifications
required for delivery of non-surgical cosmetic </em>interventions. A copy of the report
is attached. Work is also underway on a pilot breast implant registry to reassure
women that if problems arise they can be contacted, kept informed and called in for
treatment if necessary.</p><p> </p><p>As part of this programme of work to ensure
proper training and oversight of both non-surgical and surgical cosmetic interventions,
we are looking at the need for legislation to ensure public protection and will consider
bringing forward proposals.</p><p> </p><p><strong> </strong></p><p> </p>
|
|
