Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good morning.

The MPTS tribunal considering the case of Dr Helen Webberley's is due to resume at 12.00 today.

The Tribunal is expected to give its decision on what sanctions if any it will impose, following its findings of misconduct and impairment earlier in the week.

The earlier stages of the case can be found on our Substack tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tribunal-of-…

The tribunal's findings of misconduct and impairment are set out in full at dropbox.com/s/vn772ae59r9u…

Abbreviations:
SJ - Simon Jackson QC for the GMC
IS - Ian Stern QC for Helen Webberley
HW - Dr Helen Webberley
Trib - Tribunal
C - the legally qualified Panel Chairman Angus Macpherson

The hearing has not yet become public. (12.11)

The hearing is still not public; it may have begun at 12 as planned, but be in private session for now. (12.25)

[Hearing begins]

C: Apologise late start
C: Dr Webberley, tribunal will impose sanction: two months suspension.

C: Parties will wish to consider our detailed determination before deciding if there is anything else to address.
C: It is now 12.30. We could adjourn now for lunch, or we could reconvene in half an hour or so. Mr Jackson prefers lunch now?

SJ: Am happy with that - don't want to delay proceedings but need to consult with GMC; confident that reconvening after lunch will be plenty of time.
IS: 11 pages, could manage in half an hour, after lunch also OK

C: We will say reconvene 1.30 -
SJ: Let me quickly consult to see if can manage in half and hour?
C: Would prefer that so yes please consult and tell us.
SJ: Happy to do that
[Hearing pauses]

[We are informed that the hearing will resume at 1pm]

[The hearing restart has been put back to 1.30pm]

[Hearing restarts]
C: Invite SJ to speak
SJ: Refer tribunal to Guidance - para 172. Provides for this GMC order now being applied for. To protect public, or interests of doctor - including when dr may come under pressure from patients.

IS: [interrupts] Which document?
SJ: Sanctions Guidance. Begin para 172
C: Let's let SJ and HW locate these

SJ: And if we look at 173 - immediate order may be required, reasons include public confidence.
SJ: And 174 says, it may be said Dr needs time to consider but that's not case here

SJ: Says tribunal must take all factors into account.
SJ: Point is that without "immediate" order, the substantive order wd not come into effect for 28 days.

SJ: Looking at tribunal's impairment finding - it notes public protection grounds re Patient C's fertility. Found serious misconduct, and impairment. Notes HW must demonstrate development of insight to ensure no repetition.

SJ: Note that Tribunal has put in place review stage before suspension expires.
SJ: Public protection is cited
SJ: Suspension period is intended to allow HW time to set out understanding of tribunal findings, and how will not repeat, esp re patient C

SJ: If there is not an immediate order, what would happen during the 28 day period?
SJ: In absence of order - any appeal would mean that this order wd be suspended pending outcome of appeal.

SJ: Review ordered now would be suspended also. Reflective statement wd be.
SJ: If we go back to HW statement at impairment stage, she said her only plans to resume were with GenderGP registered in Singapore.

SJ: Reality is - see conviction - that HW was in online setting unable to resist patient pressure, contacts wanting treatment, HW clearly had no control. Definite risk of repetition.

SJ: GMC therefore requests *immediate* start of the order.
SJ: End of submisstion.

IS: I oppose that application. Starting point is the Act. Gives you power to apply immediate suspension *if* you are satisfied it's needed for public protection/interest, or the doctor's own protection. Not clear which GMC are arguing. All very amorphous.

IS: Sanctions Guidance you have been referred to does not deal with most important factor which is: any such order made wd be grossly disproportionate on HW. As SJ says it would last until any appeal - cd be a year or so. Draconian.

IS: Wd extend the already terribly over-long suspension in place leading up to this hearing.
IS: SJ said public protection not the point here.

IS: Clear that tribunal's findings [lists paragraphs] - tribunal says will suspend registration for 2 months, enough to allow HW to demonstrate she has understood and taken on tribunal findings.

IS: HW will not be able to supply review material from her work by defintion, as suspended, so can only be reflective statement.
IS: Immediate order would mean no work *at all* as a doctor.

IS: the 28 day gap is not the fault of HW, it is fault of the process.
IS: It is not a basis for making an order under section 38. You have found there is no need to make sanction re public interest so no evidence for immediate order on that basis

IS: Tribunal should not bend the process in order to undermine that statutory test, which is essentially what GMC are asking. Test is not met, order should not be made.

C: Thank you for your submissions. Tribunal will retire to consider whether to make order.
C: If no order made then substantive order will come into affect in 28 days. Tribunal can only make order according to the statutory reasons.

C: I advise my colleagues we can only consider application for order in context of the sanctions findings we have already made. Echo IS point that where suspension sanction has been made tribunal can only make order re suspension.

C: Any comment SJ?
SJ: Only to ask your timings
C IS?
IS: nothing to add

C: We expect to resume 2.30pm
[Hearing pauses]

[The hearing has not yet started again]

[We resume]

C: Dr Webberley the tribunal has decided to impose an immediate suspension. [Clerk] will issue written determination in due course.

[Everyone is silent - not sure what we are waiting for]

C: It has been sent - can everyone let me know when received

[all say so]
C: That completes case. Want to speak a little more.
C: Case has taken nearly a year. HW professional life has been on hold for a long time. Tribunal aware of impact of this on HW life.

C: Tribunal want to thank HW for attending all this time and for patience giving evidence etc. Also to thank all the referees that wrote to tribunal on your behalf. And to the patient & parent who gave evidence.

C: Also thank SJ and IS for advocacy and patience, especially when statement etc late. Also for sharing knowledge of this field, which tribunal did not at outset know much about.

C: And for your help in aiding tribunal's understanding.

C: Also want to thank my colleagues [missed names] who shared their knowledge and have assisted. And the tribunal staff especially Mr Singh.

[All thank chair]
[HEARING ENDS]

The Tribunal's DETERMINATION ON SANCTION – 30/06/2022 is copied in full at tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/dr-helen-web…

And the DETERMINATION ON IMMEDIATE ORDER – 30/06/2022 is copied in full at tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/dr-helen-web…

@threadreaderapp please unroll