Top surgeon suspended for sexual relationship with patient and drug prescription

A neurosurgeon has been suspended for eight months for having a sexual relationship with a patient and prescribing opioid painkillers without recording it.

Chirag Patel, a consultant at University Hospital Wales in Cardiff, carried out three procedures on the patient between February 2019 and December 2021, medical tribunal records showed.

Shortly after the first operation, they began a sexual relationship that lasted six months.

But the misconduct tribunal found a close relationship continued and Patel continued to prescribe the controlled medication until January 2023, claiming the patient made threats to expose their relationship. The tribunal heard he "bitterly regrets" his actions.

Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, which oversees the hospital, said it was aware of the suspension and Patel was not currently working for the board.

'Persistent and repeated'

Patel, who had been a permanent consultant at the hospital since 2018, was the only clinician in Wales who could treat Patient A's specific condition, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service was told.

He first performed a discectomy on Patient A in February 2019, operated again in August 2019, then a final time in December 2021.

The tribunal was told that by February 2023, the relationship had deteriorated and Patient A made accusations to the police about the doctor.

Officers did not pursue them but notified the medical director of the health board.

Patel referred himself to the General Medical Council (GMC) - the independent regulator of doctors, the same month.

GMC counsel Harriet Tighe submitted that Patel had stated he provided Patient A with his phone number because she might need to contact him for medical reasons.

She said in January 2020, while the sexual relationship was ongoing, the patient spoke to Patel about renewed symptoms and he arranged an appointment with her via his secretary rather than via a GP.

Despite missed appointments, the tribunal heard Patel continued to prescribe morphine sulphate tablets and diazepam on a non-emergency basis and without making a note in hospital records or informing the GP between May 2022 and January 2023.

"The misconduct in this case was persistent, repeated, and was an abuse of professional position which demonstrated a reckless disregard for patient safety and professional standards," Tighe said.

'Genuine remorse'

His counsel, Fiona Robertson, said that between mid-August 2019 and late January 2020 Patient A was no longer under Patel's clinical care and his evidence was that he believed his formal involvement in her treatment had come to an end.

Robertson said there was no dispute Patel's actions had seriously departed from professional standards but submitted the relationship was instigated by Patient A and "largely driven by her through the ongoing threats and blackmail".

In a written statement, Patel said he feared Patient A would report him.

"I was afraid if she did so I could lose the job I so loved and had worked so hard to obtain.

"Given my speciality, this would have a knock-on effect on other patients if I was unable to work.

"With the benefit of hindsight I know I should nonetheless have ended the relationship and been honest with my employer. However, at the time I felt panicked and unable to break it off - a decision I now bitterly regret."

Robertson added Patel accepted his behaviour amounted to misconduct and "seriously departed from professional standards".

The tribunal found that despite believing he was no longer Patient A's doctor, Patel's behaviour was reckless.

It also found he had demonstrated "genuine remorse, a high level of insight and substantial remediation, which in its view significantly reduced the risk of repetition of the misconduct".

Its ruling therefore was that eight months' suspension was the "appropriate and proportionate sanction".

It said: "In the tribunal's judgement, that period is sufficient to mark the seriousness of the misconduct, to send a clear signal to [Patel] the profession and the public that such conduct is unacceptable."