Earlier this week I posted about a christian medical doctor that had apparently “prescribed” an exorcism for a patient who went in for a routine contraceptive injection.

A General Medical Council (GMC) has since found this doctor guilty of misconduct (/hattip to PJ) although the panel said that the allegations that the doctor claimed that the patient had an “evil spirit” in her and of the need for an exorcism were not proven. The doctor in question has been suspended from practising medicine for six months for unprofessional conduct.

The panel heard that after the appointment Dr Pratt told a nurse at the clinic that she thought Mrs K may have been subject to witchcraft and that she was worried about the welfare of her two children.

However allegations the doctor told Mrs K she had an evil spirit moving inside her and needed an exorcism could not be proved, the Fitness to Practise Panel ruled.

It said it could not be certain whose account of events during the consultation were more accurate.

For some reason, the panel seems to have completely ignored the testimony of both the patient and the nurse, and based this judgement purely on the doctor’s uncoöperativeness with the investigation by the GMC.

Either the doctor was lying, or the nurse and patient were lying. Obviously not being party to the proceedings or knowing the people involved, I can’t comment on who might be telling the “truth” but it seems to me that the nurse, if anyone, would be the person for whom there is no inherent bias.

They did, however, judge the doctor’s conduct as unprofessional and not in the best interests of the patient, which in my opinion is entirely appropriate.

“Given Dr Pratt’s concerns that Mrs K was a particularly vulnerable patient, that the welfare of her children may have been at risk and that she may have been ’suicidal’, it was completely unacceptable for her to fail to update the medical notes,” the ruling read.

To be honest, I have a very difficult time understanding how a six-month suspension from practising medicine (and I presume that this is only in the UK, or possibly even England) will help in altering her perceptions about how she should treat patients. If nothing else, perhaps she should have a review after those six months have passed to assess her competency and attitudes, with an extension to her suspension if required.

If she continues to claim to see devils and demons where she should see injury or illness, perhaps this case should be re-investigated and, if proven, the suspension extended indefinitely. I know that I don’t particularly want to be treated by a medical practitioner that believes an infection is caused by a little monster with a pitchfork.

Full article over at the BBC.

This entry was posted Saturday, July 14th, 2007 at 3:00 pm and is filed under . You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.