We are gravely concerned by news that doctors found guilty of rape and sexual predation have been allowed to return to medical practice after Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) hearings (Report, 18 September). This raises crucial questions about the independence, processes and ethical integrity of the MPTS and its ability to protect public health and promote trust.
A fundamental conflict of interest is the MPTS’s funding, which comes indirectly from doctors’ fees, via the doctor’s regulator, the General Medical Council. The use of subjective mitigating factors, such as “character references” and “showing remorse” can also advantage doctors.
