The number of sexual misconduct cases involving healthcare workers has doubled in four years, The Independent can reveal, with hundreds sanctioned including doctors, paramedics and GPs.
Sanctions for sexual misconduct accounted for one in 10 rulings against health and social care workers in 2023/24, with 249 cases in the past year.
But the Professional Standards Authority, which oversees all health and care regulators, has warned many of the complaints are not being dealt with properly by watchdogs.
These include:
- A doctor who sexually harassed seven colleagues but a tribunal found their fitness to practice was not impaired
- A pharmacist who carried out a vaginal examination without clinical justification
- A paramedic who acted in a sexual manner towards a patient and a junior colleague
- A doctor who had a sexual relationship with a vulnerable patient
PSA figures show that sexual misconduct cases have increased year on year, jumping from 124 in 2020/21 to 249 in 2023/24.
The authority launched 30 appeals last year against healthcare professional regulators for the way a number of these complaints have been dealt with, including nine for sexual misconduct.
Concerns over the cases included regulators failing to consider whether misconduct revealed a deep-seated problem, failure to charge sexual motivation where there was evidence of it, failure to properly investigate incidents of sexual misconduct, future risk of a person repeating the misconduct and failure to properly test the credibility of evidence.
Have you been impacted by this story? email rebecca.thomas@independent.co.uk
The Royal College of Surgeons described the figures as “deeply disturbing” and said it is looking at how investigation and reporting processes can be improved.
Tim Mitchell, president of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, said: “There should be absolutely no place in healthcare for those perpetrating sexual harassment or assault. It is deeply disturbing that hundreds of medical professionals are committing sexual misconduct. It is difficult to tell if this is due to an increase in these abhorrent behaviours, or if more healthcare staff feel able to come forward and report incidents of sexual misconduct.
“We need to support victims and bystanders to feel safe and confident in reporting misconduct. In addition to publishing a new code of conduct that makes crystal clear that sexual misconduct has no place in our profession, the Royal College of Surgeons of England is looking at how reporting and investigation processes can be improved. It is also vital that regulators take tough action on perpetrators.”
And Dr Rebecca Cox, co-founder of the Surviving in Scrubs campaign group, told The Independent: “It’s very concerning we are seeing larger numbers of sexual misconduct cases and my fear is that these cases are still underreported.”
Dr Cox, who helped sparked a major #MeToo movement in medicine, added that the outcomes of some disciplinary tribunals “do not seem adequate” and that justice needs to be seen to be done for the sake of victims.
In a letter to the PSA this week, the Doctors’ Association UK (DAUK), which represents doctors, challenged the decision by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service to only give surgeon James Gilbert an eight-month suspension after he was found to have sexually harassed colleagues, made racist comments and abused his senior position.
The DAUK has called for the surgeon to be erased from the medical register for his “aborrhent” behaviour and it is the first time the organisation has claimed a decision by the MPTS was insufficient to protect the public.
The damning statistics come after a series of reports from The Independent revealing failures by professional regulators such as the General Medical Council or Nursing and Midwifery Council to act on allegations of sexual assault.
In a warning published last month, the PSA suggested some regulators were failing to properly act on cases where health workers have sexually assaulted a colleague.
It said: “We see failures to give adequate reasoning as to why, despite the seriousness of the conduct, the public interest does not require a finding of impairment… Failure to give adequate reasons as to the sufficiency of sanction, (especially where the seriousness of the conduct found proved indicates that a more severe sanction should be imposed) and/or properly consider and refer to the relevant guidance.”
The PSA pointed to a recent case it has taken out against the General Medical Council and the Medical Practioners Tribunal Services (MPTS), in which a doctor sexually harassed seven colleagues. The PSA said the MPTS had “powerful evidence about the type of working environment that his conduct had created, but was persuaded by remediation evidence”.
The tribunal found the misconduct had occurred but did not rule the doctor’s fitness to practice was impaired. The GMC challenged the MPTS’s decision. The PSA said it shared the GMC’s concerns but added the GMC should have made a case that his behaviour was sexually motivated.
It said: “The GMC had charged inappropriate behaviour and unlawful sexual harassment (which was admitted) but not sexual motivation… the failure to charge sexual motivation meant that the panel did not properly calibrate the seriousness of the misconduct, with consequences for its assessment of insight and sanction.”
The GMC told The Independent in response it had appealed against that decision, alongside the PSA.
In a case involving the General Pharmaceutical Council, a pharmacist who carried out an internal vaginal examination on a patient without clinical justification was given a six-month suspension, despite evidence of sexual motivation.
The latest findings come after research published by the PSA in 2018 that raised concerns fitness to practice panels were treating sexual behaviour with colleagues as less serious than sexual misconduct with patients.
A GMC spokesperson said: “We absolutely condemn sexual misconduct and have always been clear there can be no place for any form of sexual harassment, discrimination, misogyny, or bullying in the medical profession.” It said it had updated its guidance to make clear acting in a sexual way towards patients or colleagues is unacceptable.
“Where there are concerns a doctor has breached these standards we can and will investigate, taking into consideration the individual circumstances of the case and obtaining all relevant evidence. Any case of a serious nature will be referred to a medical tribunal to make an independent decision about their fitness to practise and any sanction. In many cases involving sexual allegations, the GMC’s position will be that such serious misconduct is incompatible with continued registration.”
A spokesperson for the General Pharmaceutical Council said: “We take allegations of a sexual nature very seriously. This matter is due to be reconsidered at another hearing in due course after the PSA appealed the decision. Whenever an appeal is raised we review all decisions and cooperate with the PSA as part of the process.”
A spokesperson for the Health and Care Professions Council, which regulates paramedics, said it takes allegations of sexual misconduct extremely seriously.
The HCPC added it has no formal legal powers to overturn its independent panel decisions and in the case highlighted by the PSA the panel had decided the worker’s actions amounted to misconduct but there was no need for further action. It is reviewing the decision after the PSA informed the watchdog that it planned to appeal against the ruling.
“The registrant has now received a two-year caution order,” it said.
The MPTS declined to give an on-the-record statement.