Latest news with #MedicalPractitionersTribunalService


NDTV
a day ago
- Health
- NDTV
Indian-Origin Doctor In UK Suspended For Forcing Mother To Have Baby Using Forceps
An Indian-origin consultant gynaecologist in the UK has been suspended after she was found guilty of serious professional misconduct. The 62-year-old allegedly pressured a first-time mother into a forceps delivery against her will. Premila Thampi, from Mitcham in South London, allegedly bullied the patient - who requested a caesarean section - into accepting forceps-assisted delivery at Milton Keynes University Hospital in October 2016. The woman, 41 weeks pregnant and suffering from a neuromuscular condition, later reportedly said she was feeling traumatised by the experience and said the forceps caused injuries to her baby's head and face. During the encounter, Ms Thampi allegedly made it clear that she was the senior, implying she could have left the delivery to a junior doctor instead of staying beyond her shift. Testimony at the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) in Manchester said that she ignored the patient's repeated objections to forceps, saying, "You are putting your own baby at risk." "You need to let me do this, as I don't know what is going to happen to your baby." The patient eventually gave in to the forceps delivery but reportedly shouted at the doctor, "I hate you, you haven't listened," as the instrument was used. "She just marched into the room to ask me if I was ready for an instrumental delivery and then marched back out again. Dr Thampi didn't explain what an instrumental delivery would involve, or what the instruments to be used were... I verbalised to Dr Thampi that I was against the use of forceps," the woman told a British tabloid. The MPTS ruled that Ms Thampi committed serious professional misconduct, citing her failure to obtain informed consent, her pressure on the patient, and her inappropriate communication. It suspended her from medical practice for three weeks. Tribunal chair Tehniat Watson called the misconduct serious, citing lack of consent, patient pressure, and poor communication, and said the "action is needed to mark the seriousness to uphold the wider public interest." In her defence, Ms Thampi argued the patient raised objections to the use of forceps only when it was already too late, from a clinical standpoint, to safely proceed with a caesarean section.


India Today
2 days ago
- Health
- India Today
Indian-origin doctor suspended in UK for forcefully using forceps to deliver baby
An Indian-origin consultant gynaecologist has been suspended after being found guilty of serious professional misconduct. She was accused of bullying a first-time mother into agreeing to the use of forceps during childbirth in the UK's Eaglestone. The patient wanted to deliver the baby through C-section. However, the doctor insisted on using forceps, leaving her traumatised and also causing damage to her baby's head, the woman Premila Thampi, 62, from Mitcham, South London, was said to have "gone on a bit of a warpath" when she realised the woman was unable to have the baby naturally, The UK's Daily Mail incident occurred at Milton Keynes University Hospital in October 2016, where Dr Thampi reportedly pressured the patient, who had clearly requested a caesarean section, to accept an instrumental delivery instead. Colleagues witnessed Dr Thampi refusing the patient's plea, insisting on using forceps and stating her seniority to justify the decision. A caesarean section, or C-section, is a way of delivering a baby through an operation. She then 'pressurised' the patient into letting her use the forceps, saying, "You need to let me do this as I don't know what is going to happen to your baby. You are putting your own baby at risk."Forceps are a tong-like medical tool used during childbirth to help gently pull the baby out if the mother has difficulty woman begrudgingly agreed to the use of the surgical instrument but shouted, "I hate you, you haven't listened' at Dr Thampi as the forceps were applied," according to the said she was left traumatised by the birth and claimed the forceps caused damage to her baby's head and THAMPI FOUND GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT, SUSPENDED BY MEDICAL TRIBUNALAt the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) in Manchester, Dr Thampi was found guilty of serious professional misconduct and was ordered to be suspended from practice for three weeks, The Daily Mail above-mentioned incident happened in October 2016 when she was working as a Consultant in Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Milton Keynes University a statement, Patient A, who was 41 weeks pregnant and suffers from a neuromuscular condition, said that Dr Thampi came to check on her after she was admitted and suggested the use of forceps, which she said she clearly refused, The Daily Mail reported."She just marched into the room to ask me if I was ready for an instrumental delivery and then marched back out again. Dr Thampi didn't explain what an instrumental delivery would involve, or what the instruments to be used were. I knew about the use of suction and a ventouse, and I verbalised to Dr Thampi that I was against the use of forceps," the woman was quoted as saying by the Tabloid.'I COULD HAVE GONE HOME AND LEFT THIS TO REGISTRAR'advertisement"I was told that I did not want the forceps to be used, and I haven't pushed yet. Miss Thampi then said something I will never forget for the rest of my days, "What you need to understand and appreciate is that I am a consultant, and it is after six o'clock and I could have gone home and left one of my Registrar's to deliver this baby," the woman 62-year-old doctor, in a statement, said the patient said she did not want a forceps delivery but only when, in her clinical judgment, it was too late to safely change to a Caesarean Chair Tehniat Watson highlighted serious issues of lack of informed consent and patient pressure, emphasising the need for action to protect public interest."Whilst the conduct involved one patient a significant number of years ago, the failure to obtain informed consent, Patient A being pressurised into agreeing to a forceps delivery, and inappropriate communication were serious matters and action is needed to mark the seriousness to uphold the wider public interest," the Daily Mail quoted Watson as saying.- Ends advertisement


North Wales Chronicle
11-06-2025
- Health
- North Wales Chronicle
No disciplinary sanction for doctor's ‘grave' failures in care of Martha Mills
Professor Richard Thompson did not refer Martha Mills, 13, to intensive care despite her displaying several high-risk indicators of sepsis. The on-call consultant also chose not to return to London's King's College Hospital to assess her in person as her condition deteriorated. A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) panel sitting in Manchester had ruled those omissions were misconduct, which they described as 'particularly grave', and found his fitness to practise was impaired. However, on Wednesday the tribunal decided there were 'exceptional circumstances' which justified taking no further action against the world-renowned paediatric liver specialist. Martha had been an inpatient on the hospital's Rays of Sunshine Ward after she suffered a serious injury to her pancreas when she slipped while riding a bike on a family holiday in Wales in July 2021. Weeks later she experienced a fever and increased heart rate, followed by more spikes in her temperature before the consultant hepatologist saw Martha on his morning ward round on Sunday August 29. Prof Thompson left the hospital at 3pm, but was phoned at home two hours later by a trainee doctor, who gave an update on Martha's condition. Medical records showed she had deteriorated over the course of the afternoon, and into the early evening, with a drop in her blood pressure, the appearance of a new rash and increases in heart rate, respiratory rate and body temperature. Tribunal chairman Robin Ince noted that by 5pm there were 'several high-risk indicators' as set out in the Nice guidelines relating to sepsis. The duty registrar called Prof Thompson again at 8.30pm because of ongoing concerns over Martha's fever, but she was kept on the ward despite the continued presence of moderate to high-risk indicators and the absence of meaningful clinical improvement. Martha collapsed on August 30 and was moved to intensive care before she was transferred to London's Great Ormond Street Hospital, where she died in the early hours of August 31. Announcing its conclusions on Wednesday, Mr Ince said: 'Professor Thompson has done everything possible to address his failings. 'The tribunal considered that the best way to repair any harm caused by his failings would be for him to continue to provide his specialist expertise at home and abroad. 'To now – some four years after the index event – remove Professor Thompson from practice, even for a short period of time, for one single lapse of judgment in an otherwise exemplary career would, in the tribunal's view, be akin to punishment which is not the role of the MPTS.' Among the 'exceptional circumstances' cited were that there was no allegation or evidence that Prof Thompson either caused or contributed to Martha's death. There were also systemic failings regarding how the ward functioned at the time with regard to referrals to the paediatric intensive care unit, said the tribunal. Mr Ince said: 'A sufficiently clear message has already been sent to the profession and to the public – that even such an experienced doctor as Professor Thompson could still make serious errors of clinical judgment for which he will be called to account. 'The public would be aware that this finding would remain a stain on Professor Thompson's reputation for the rest of his life.' At a 2022 inquest into her death, a coroner ruled that Martha would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs and transferred her to intensive care earlier. Martha's mother, Merope Mills, an editor at The Guardian, said she and her husband, Paul Laity, raised concerns about Martha's deteriorating health a number of times but these were not acted on. The couple later successfully campaigned for Martha's Rule to give patients, families and carers the chance to easily request a second opinion from a senior doctor in the same hospital in the event of a suspected deterioration or serious concern. Giving evidence, Prof Thompson told the MPTS hearing that he no longer provided in-patient care because he began to 'doubt my own judgment' after the tragic events. He said he felt 'deep remorse' for Martha's death but did not believe he made any errors in her case, as he denied all the allegations brought by the General Medical Council (GMC). The tribunal heard he had since completed a training course relating to the management of sepsis and a deteriorating child in paediatric care. His barrister, Ben Rich, said Prof Thompson has been a dedicated doctor and specialist for nearly 40 years and had never previously been investigated by a regulator. He said he had a reputation as a 'hard-working and outstanding clinician and researcher, who has an international reputation as one of the leading paediatric liver specialists in the world'. Mr Rich urged the tribunal members to impose an order of conditions involving supervision on Prof Thompson's registration, but the panel disagreed and said such a measure would be 'unnecessary and artificial', as they opted to take no further action. Christopher Rose, for the GMC, said that Prof Thompson should be suspended to send a message to the wider public and the wider profession, given the seriousness of the failings found. The tribunal had cleared Prof Thompson of the GMC's claims that he gave 'outdated, misleading' information on Martha's condition to a consultant colleague in the intensive care unit, and that he failed to mention her rash. In ruling his fitness to practise was impaired, Mr Ince said: 'There had been a significant potential risk of harm to Martha and it was appropriate to send a message to the profession as to the importance of following the basic and fundamental principles as set out in good medical practice so as to ensure that the potential risks of an adverse outcome are always taken into account.'

Leader Live
11-06-2025
- Health
- Leader Live
No disciplinary sanction for doctor's ‘grave' failures in care of Martha Mills
Professor Richard Thompson did not refer Martha Mills, 13, to intensive care despite her displaying several high-risk indicators of sepsis. The on-call consultant also chose not to return to London's King's College Hospital to assess her in person as her condition deteriorated. A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) panel sitting in Manchester had ruled those omissions were misconduct, which they described as 'particularly grave', and found his fitness to practise was impaired. However, on Wednesday the tribunal decided there were 'exceptional circumstances' which justified taking no further action against the world-renowned paediatric liver specialist. Martha had been an inpatient on the hospital's Rays of Sunshine Ward after she suffered a serious injury to her pancreas when she slipped while riding a bike on a family holiday in Wales in July 2021. Weeks later she experienced a fever and increased heart rate, followed by more spikes in her temperature before the consultant hepatologist saw Martha on his morning ward round on Sunday August 29. Prof Thompson left the hospital at 3pm, but was phoned at home two hours later by a trainee doctor, who gave an update on Martha's condition. Medical records showed she had deteriorated over the course of the afternoon, and into the early evening, with a drop in her blood pressure, the appearance of a new rash and increases in heart rate, respiratory rate and body temperature. Tribunal chairman Robin Ince noted that by 5pm there were 'several high-risk indicators' as set out in the Nice guidelines relating to sepsis. The duty registrar called Prof Thompson again at 8.30pm because of ongoing concerns over Martha's fever, but she was kept on the ward despite the continued presence of moderate to high-risk indicators and the absence of meaningful clinical improvement. Martha collapsed on August 30 and was moved to intensive care before she was transferred to London's Great Ormond Street Hospital, where she died in the early hours of August 31. Announcing its conclusions on Wednesday, Mr Ince said: 'Professor Thompson has done everything possible to address his failings. 'The tribunal considered that the best way to repair any harm caused by his failings would be for him to continue to provide his specialist expertise at home and abroad. 'To now – some four years after the index event – remove Professor Thompson from practice, even for a short period of time, for one single lapse of judgment in an otherwise exemplary career would, in the tribunal's view, be akin to punishment which is not the role of the MPTS.' Among the 'exceptional circumstances' cited were that there was no allegation or evidence that Prof Thompson either caused or contributed to Martha's death. There were also systemic failings regarding how the ward functioned at the time with regard to referrals to the paediatric intensive care unit, said the tribunal. Mr Ince said: 'A sufficiently clear message has already been sent to the profession and to the public – that even such an experienced doctor as Professor Thompson could still make serious errors of clinical judgment for which he will be called to account. 'The public would be aware that this finding would remain a stain on Professor Thompson's reputation for the rest of his life.' At a 2022 inquest into her death, a coroner ruled that Martha would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs and transferred her to intensive care earlier. Martha's mother, Merope Mills, an editor at The Guardian, said she and her husband, Paul Laity, raised concerns about Martha's deteriorating health a number of times but these were not acted on. The couple later successfully campaigned for Martha's Rule to give patients, families and carers the chance to easily request a second opinion from a senior doctor in the same hospital in the event of a suspected deterioration or serious concern. Giving evidence, Prof Thompson told the MPTS hearing that he no longer provided in-patient care because he began to 'doubt my own judgment' after the tragic events. He said he felt 'deep remorse' for Martha's death but did not believe he made any errors in her case, as he denied all the allegations brought by the General Medical Council (GMC). The tribunal heard he had since completed a training course relating to the management of sepsis and a deteriorating child in paediatric care. His barrister, Ben Rich, said Prof Thompson has been a dedicated doctor and specialist for nearly 40 years and had never previously been investigated by a regulator. He said he had a reputation as a 'hard-working and outstanding clinician and researcher, who has an international reputation as one of the leading paediatric liver specialists in the world'. Mr Rich urged the tribunal members to impose an order of conditions involving supervision on Prof Thompson's registration, but the panel disagreed and said such a measure would be 'unnecessary and artificial', as they opted to take no further action. Christopher Rose, for the GMC, said that Prof Thompson should be suspended to send a message to the wider public and the wider profession, given the seriousness of the failings found. The tribunal had cleared Prof Thompson of the GMC's claims that he gave 'outdated, misleading' information on Martha's condition to a consultant colleague in the intensive care unit, and that he failed to mention her rash. In ruling his fitness to practise was impaired, Mr Ince said: 'There had been a significant potential risk of harm to Martha and it was appropriate to send a message to the profession as to the importance of following the basic and fundamental principles as set out in good medical practice so as to ensure that the potential risks of an adverse outcome are always taken into account.'

Rhyl Journal
11-06-2025
- Health
- Rhyl Journal
No disciplinary sanction for doctor's ‘grave' failures in care of Martha Mills
Professor Richard Thompson did not refer Martha Mills, 13, to intensive care despite her displaying several high-risk indicators of sepsis. The on-call consultant also chose not to return to London's King's College Hospital to assess her in person as her condition deteriorated. A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) panel sitting in Manchester had ruled those omissions were misconduct, which they described as 'particularly grave', and found his fitness to practise was impaired. However, on Wednesday the tribunal decided there were 'exceptional circumstances' which justified taking no further action against the world-renowned paediatric liver specialist. Martha had been an inpatient on the hospital's Rays of Sunshine Ward after she suffered a serious injury to her pancreas when she slipped while riding a bike on a family holiday in Wales in July 2021. Weeks later she experienced a fever and increased heart rate, followed by more spikes in her temperature before the consultant hepatologist saw Martha on his morning ward round on Sunday August 29. Prof Thompson left the hospital at 3pm, but was phoned at home two hours later by a trainee doctor, who gave an update on Martha's condition. Medical records showed she had deteriorated over the course of the afternoon, and into the early evening, with a drop in her blood pressure, the appearance of a new rash and increases in heart rate, respiratory rate and body temperature. Tribunal chairman Robin Ince noted that by 5pm there were 'several high-risk indicators' as set out in the Nice guidelines relating to sepsis. The duty registrar called Prof Thompson again at 8.30pm because of ongoing concerns over Martha's fever, but she was kept on the ward despite the continued presence of moderate to high-risk indicators and the absence of meaningful clinical improvement. Martha collapsed on August 30 and was moved to intensive care before she was transferred to London's Great Ormond Street Hospital, where she died in the early hours of August 31. Announcing its conclusions on Wednesday, Mr Ince said: 'Professor Thompson has done everything possible to address his failings. 'The tribunal considered that the best way to repair any harm caused by his failings would be for him to continue to provide his specialist expertise at home and abroad. 'To now – some four years after the index event – remove Professor Thompson from practice, even for a short period of time, for one single lapse of judgment in an otherwise exemplary career would, in the tribunal's view, be akin to punishment which is not the role of the MPTS.' Among the 'exceptional circumstances' cited were that there was no allegation or evidence that Prof Thompson either caused or contributed to Martha's death. There were also systemic failings regarding how the ward functioned at the time with regard to referrals to the paediatric intensive care unit, said the tribunal. Mr Ince said: 'A sufficiently clear message has already been sent to the profession and to the public – that even such an experienced doctor as Professor Thompson could still make serious errors of clinical judgment for which he will be called to account. 'The public would be aware that this finding would remain a stain on Professor Thompson's reputation for the rest of his life.' At a 2022 inquest into her death, a coroner ruled that Martha would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs and transferred her to intensive care earlier. Martha's mother, Merope Mills, an editor at The Guardian, said she and her husband, Paul Laity, raised concerns about Martha's deteriorating health a number of times but these were not acted on. The couple later successfully campaigned for Martha's Rule to give patients, families and carers the chance to easily request a second opinion from a senior doctor in the same hospital in the event of a suspected deterioration or serious concern. Giving evidence, Prof Thompson told the MPTS hearing that he no longer provided in-patient care because he began to 'doubt my own judgment' after the tragic events. He said he felt 'deep remorse' for Martha's death but did not believe he made any errors in her case, as he denied all the allegations brought by the General Medical Council (GMC). The tribunal heard he had since completed a training course relating to the management of sepsis and a deteriorating child in paediatric care. His barrister, Ben Rich, said Prof Thompson has been a dedicated doctor and specialist for nearly 40 years and had never previously been investigated by a regulator. He said he had a reputation as a 'hard-working and outstanding clinician and researcher, who has an international reputation as one of the leading paediatric liver specialists in the world'. Mr Rich urged the tribunal members to impose an order of conditions involving supervision on Prof Thompson's registration, but the panel disagreed and said such a measure would be 'unnecessary and artificial', as they opted to take no further action. Christopher Rose, for the GMC, said that Prof Thompson should be suspended to send a message to the wider public and the wider profession, given the seriousness of the failings found. The tribunal had cleared Prof Thompson of the GMC's claims that he gave 'outdated, misleading' information on Martha's condition to a consultant colleague in the intensive care unit, and that he failed to mention her rash. In ruling his fitness to practise was impaired, Mr Ince said: 'There had been a significant potential risk of harm to Martha and it was appropriate to send a message to the profession as to the importance of following the basic and fundamental principles as set out in good medical practice so as to ensure that the potential risks of an adverse outcome are always taken into account.'