Tribunal suspends GP for three months
A Doune GP has been suspended for three months for acting dishonestly in dealings over an autistic child at the Camphill Blair Drummond Care Home.
A Medical Practice Tribunal imposed the suspension on Dr Charles Jardine, a full-time partner at Doune Health Centre, following a misconduct hearing in October.
In a determination on facts it was found that Dr Jardine, in an email dated October 14, 2015, had failed to accurately report details of a consultation with the child’s parents to Camphill by giving the impression he had countered the parents’ suggestion their child should eat alone when stressed.
He told Camphill he had told the parents the care home was ‘successfully trying to normalise [the boy’s] eating and socialising experience at Camphill and that it would be better not to try and treat him differently’ when this was untrue.
Dr Jardine further sent an edited copy of the initial email to Camphill, also dated October 14, 2015, to the parents to give the impression this had been sent to Camphill, concealing the initial email.
The Tribunal concluded that Dr Jardine had acted dishonestly and considered that aggravating factors were the context of his medical practice as well as the email having the potential of causing the parents’ concerns to be taken less seriously.
Mitigating factors included no patient harm caused as a result of Dr Jardine’s actions, and that the initial email had been ‘drafted in haste and ill considered’ and ‘lacked any degree of premeditation’.
And the second email’s redactions were ‘limited to modifying the tone and there was no attempt to alter the substance of the email’.
It was also pointed out that Dr Jardine had expressed genuine regret and remorse and that the impact of the proceedings have had a profound impact upon him.
Dr Jardine had also taken steps to reflect on his misconduct and to remediate. He was described as ‘otherwise a person of good character’ and the Tribunal’s findings were ‘a single episode of misconduct in an otherwise unblemished and exemplary career spanning approximately 30 years’.
The tribunal determined Dr Jardine’s fitness to practise was impaired and suspended his registration for three months.
A determination on sanction, dated November 2, stated: ‘The Tribunal therefore determined that a period of suspension would be an appropriate and proportionate sanction.
‘The Tribunal took account of the impact that suspension will have upon Dr Jardine, and others who rely upon his contribution to the medical profession.
‘However, in all the circumstances the Tribunal concluded that Dr Jardine’s interests are outweighed by the need to promote and maintain public confidence in the medical profession and to promote and maintain proper professional standards and conduct for members of the profession.
‘The Tribunal determined that the shortest period of suspension it could impose consistent with the need to maintain public confidence in the medical profession and promote and maintain proper professional standards and conduct for members of the profession would be three months.
‘The Tribunal was satisfied that a suspension of Dr Jardine’s registration for this period would be sufficient, in the circumstances of this case, to send a clear message to Dr Jardine, the profession, and the wider public that dishonesty constitutes behaviour unbefitting a registered medical practitioner and will result in action being taken upon a medical practitioner’s registration.’