High-profile medical professionals’ abuse in a healthcare setting

It is a matter of acute public concern that cases of this nature reoccur, when patients and health professionals alike should be assured of their safety in a healthcare setting.

NHS organisations must comply with the sexual safety in healthcare organisational charter.   

 

This was published in 2023 by NHS England with the aim of promoting a zero-tolerance approach towards sexual misconduct.  Compliance with this is more than just writing a sexual safety policy or even carrying out an audit; it is a process of learning and improvement, as was made clear by the latest letter to Trusts and Integrated Care Boards sent in August 2025. 

 

When there are occurrences of abuse in a healthcare setting, it is vital that those affected should feel secure in their ability to make a report quickly and safely. 

 

It is really important that when such concerns are raised, they are always taken seriously, and investigated with an open mind, no matter the circumstances of the complainant or the seniority of the person about whom they have complained. 

Leigh Day’s abuse team has represented and continues to represent many survivors of abuse in a healthcare setting. 

 

The process of obtaining accountability and redress for abuse in a healthcare setting can be complex, with parallel processes going on. In addition to instructing us in a civil claim, our clients may also be involved as complainants or witnesses in criminal and regulatory proceedings.   

 

There may be an internal investigation too. NHS organisations are required to have procedures for handling concerns about the conduct of medical and dental employees. The “Maintaining High Professional Standards in the NHS” framework covers how cases of misconduct should be investigated. This also covers exclusion from work where appropriate, which will include when serious concerns are raised about a practitioner. 

 

Internal Trust investigations may be “paused” whilst a police investigation is under way.  However, if criminal charges are not brought or there is no court conviction that should not necessarily be the end of the matter. If there is enough evidence to suggest a potential danger to patients, then the Trust has a public duty to take action to ensure that the individual concerned does not pose a risk to patient safety. 

 

It is important that these processes are properly followed. In too many cases in which we have been involved, complaints have not been properly investigated and / or internal processes have become protracted.  Our clients have sometimes felt that they have needed to “drive” the process.    

 

The sexual misconduct policy framework includes guidance on how to ensure that robust investigations are undertaken, including appointing expert advisors and investigators who are specifically trained in dealing with sexual misconduct. 

 

In cases we have handled, had the survivors’ reports of abuse been taken seriously immediately, some of the perpetrators could potentially have been stopped before they went on to harm other patients. 

 

It is important in a healthcare setting that chaperone policies are properly adhered to: a doctor should not be able to suggest to a patient that a chaperone is not necessary, and the chaperone must always be able to view properly the medical examination. The latest NHS England letter makes clear that NHS chaperoning policies must also be reviewed. Policies should ensure chaperones understand the purpose of procedures; that the purpose is documented; and that they are empowered to act on or report concerns when necessary. 

  

The roles of doctors and other clinicians can legitimise touching under the guise of an examination or treatment and such is the trust we place in healthcare practitioners that it is difficult for many, if not most, patients to question the legitimacy of that touching. 

 

In the healthcare setting, patients should be asked for feedback which encourages them to report if anything they were not expecting happens at a consultation and patient feedback should be regularly reviewed. 

 

This can detect concerns about a practitioner’s conduct which patients may not be in a position to report as complaints. For example, when assaulting his patients, by touching areas of their bodies that did not require treatments, physiotherapist Purnoor Bawa would insist it was common practice and part of their recovery. 

Leigh Day has settled multiple cases for survivors of Dr Manish Shah, including one case that has just settled for £100,000 compensation.   

 

Records of intimate examinations should be kept and audited. In Dr Shah’s case, although he falsified records to give the impression that patients had wanted tests when in fact they submitted to his persuasion to have them, he did keep detailed records of many inappropriate breast, vaginal and anal examinations.   

 

If his notes had been audited, it would have become clear that he was conducting excessive intimate examinations without clinical justification.  Auditing of the tests he was ordering should also have given rise to concern, as he was ordering smear tests on patients who did not meet the clinical criteria and taking swabs and smears without sending off the samples for testing – so there would have been a mismatch between his records and the test results. 

 

Electronic patient records also offer opportunities to detect inappropriate access.

• Survivor of therapist abuse and campaigner Ella Janneh  
• “Holly” who was assaulted at work by the now struck off nurse Niyi Okegbola 
• Adult women abused by physiotherapist Purnoor Bawa 
• Adult male victims of GP Dr Gregory Manson 
• Psychiatrist Dr Vijay Gaikwad 
• A young adult patient of Dr Francis Bailey 
• Female members of the Manchester Jewish Orthodox community assaulted by Dr Wayne Davis