We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Updated 20.52
A FITNESS TO practice inquiry in front of a Medical Council has found Dr Mohamed Abdelrahman guilty of professional misconduct on three counts..
Dr Abdelrahman, a 27-year-old Sudanese national who has been based in the Obstetrics and Gynaecology department at Letterkenny General Hospital since January 2016, had already admitted that he failed to inform the Medical Council that he had been refused registration by the British General Medical Council (GMC) on two occasions.
RTÉ News reports that he has now been found guilty of professional misconduct.
Earlier this afternoon, the committee heard from an expert witness of his worries that the failings of the Donegal-based doctor charged could impact upon patient welfare.
This afternoon Professor Stephen Lane, a consultant respiratory physician at Tallaght Hospital, told the inquiry that he would have “grave misgivings” about Dr Abdelrahman in light of his transgressions.
“It was well known to (Dr Abdelrahman) that he had failed in his application to the GMC a number of times with regard to his English language skills,” Lane told the inquiry.
That act is professional misconduct in my view.
Lane said that he saw a pattern of “a certain amount of recidivism” in Abdelrahman’s actions, given he had applied to the GMC seven times and had failed to inform the Medical Council of having failed in those applications twice.
When counsel for Abdelrahman John Freeman told Lane that his client’s behaviour with regard to the GMC was irrelevant to this inquiry, Lane replied: “I have a problem with the recidivistic nature of the prolonged number of applications made in quantifying the degree to which he departed from the norm.”
This is a particular problem when it has gone on for a number of years.
When Freeman contended that the charges facing Abdelrahman in no way relate to “poor clinical performance”, Lane replied: “I don’t accept that there is no relevance to protection of patients here, I think that anyone who has shown poor conduct on a number of occasions… I would have concerns that would translate into poor medical performance.”
It’s an honesty issue.
Lane said that he could understand someone “perhaps fudging the date they took an exam” as being an example of less serious misconduct.
“But when you’ve got seven applications made to a licensing body like the GMC then that is a serious issue,” he said. Replying to this, Freeman once more stressed that his client faces no charges regarding his dealings with the GMC.
Lane replied that “as a peer medical practitioner these two instances would make me very concerned”.
“So to summarise, these actions represent a serious falling short in standards, professional misconduct which has already been admitted to?” Freeman said.
“The issue is we have a doctor working in a country for a long time who has falsified his application and then again with its renewal, that is a problem that needs to be addressed,” Lane replied.
Lane further claimed that the fact English isn’t Abdelrahman’s first language was of no relevance.
“That fact isn’t important,” he said. “We have many of these types of application coming through.”
References
The inquiry also heard a number of references as to Dr Abdelrahman’s character from Freeman.
Dr Eddie Aboud, a colleague of Abdelrahman’s at Letterkenny General Hospital, described him as “a good SHO (Senior House Officer), keen to learn, who has improved his ability and knowledge in the last six months”.
“The practitioner is a quiet character but does his work well,” Freeman read.
If I were asked would I hire him again, the answer is yes.
That reference was given in light of Abdelrahman discussing his dealings with the GMC with Dr Aboud, Freeman said.
Several references were read from Sudanese medical professionals based in Khartoum, who had known Abdelrahman during his academic studies.
“Yes I believe him to be of good character,” read one. “I believe he understands the faults in his actions and will not commit them again.”
Abdelrahman’s university tutor in Khartoum meanwhile described him as being “of good character, he realises his mistakes”.
I would recommend him for any position in the future.
A representative of the University of Khartoum had submitted a reference describing Abdelrahman as “academically one of the most distinguished and outstanding students – competent, talented, and brilliant”.
Closer to home, Dr Micheál Newell of NUI Galway, said that he would be “delighted” to recommend Abdelrahman.
“I have every confidence in his ability to excel in his chosen medical career,” said Newell.
Newell met Abdelrahman when he registered for a medical masters degree in Galway in September 2015, and it was understood that the reference was given in an academic context said Freeman, notwithstanding the fact Newell is also a qualified medical doctor and was aware of the nature of the Medical Council’s inquiry.
Earlier
The committee had this morning heard that Dr Abdelrahman’s refusal by the GMC in November 2012 was based on his failure to reach required standards on an English language competency test, known as IELTS, which is a minimum requirement for practicing doctors in the UK.
He subsequently contended that he had successfully appealed his scores on the IELTS test, and that they had been upgraded to a sufficient level to allow him pass minimum competency.
When the GMC asked for proof of this appeal, Dr Abdelrahman submitted a score sheet covered in sellotape, with the relevant scores both indistinct and to be found on creases on the page that were also covered in sellotape, and that one of the relevant scores was off centre on the certificate.
Abdelrahman explained the condition of the certificate as explained by the fact he had spilt tea on it. He was unable to produce proof of his having paid for such an appeal. This explanation was deemed to be “implausible” by the GMC, which stated that Abdelrahman had “embarked on a course of unacceptable conduct in order to mislead the GMC”, and that he had shown “no evidence of insight into or remorse for his actions”.
“Victim of fraud”
On the basis of this, the GMC refused Abdelrahman’s application and suggested that he had not proved his competency. Abdelrahman contended at the time that he believed his inability to produce sufficient evidence of his competency was a result of his being a victim of fraud in Sudan.
Abdelrahman’s original IELTS scores would have been sufficient for him to be declared competent in the eyes of the Irish Medical Council, the required scores here being less stringent than in the UK.
All told Abdelrahman applied to the GMC seven times. Four times he sought exempt status relieving him of the need to prove his proficiency in English. These were all refused. Three times he applied for registration as a medical practitioner, although one of these applications made in 2013 was withdrawn after it was found the IELTS scoresheet submitted had been tampered with in a similar fashion to that of the 2012 application.
Abdelrahman’s final application to the GMC, made in August 2014, was made after he had retaken the IELTS test and achieved the necessary scores. On this occasion he was refused given the historical issues surrounding his previous application.
During this two-year period the doctor had applied for a number of medical positions in the UK while saying that he was an officially registered medical practitioner there which was not the case.
Though he had received a number of offers, these had all been withdrawn once due diligence showed he was not in fact registered. He has never worked in the UK.
The specific charges Abdelrahman faced today relate to alleged professional misconduct and poor professional performance concerning his failure to admit to the Irish Medical Council when applying for medical registration, and renewal of same, that he had previously been refused by the GMC.
It is also alleged that having been refused by the GMC for a second time in April 2015 Abdelrahman once more failed to notify the Medical Council of same.
“Accepts the allegations”
Defending the doctor, barrister John Freeman said that his client “accepts without equivocation” the factual allegations of the Medical Council.
Freeman contended that at the time of the initial application to the GMC “Dr Abdelrahman was a very young practitioner and this is at the root of the issues”.
“He received his degree at age 22 and was the same age when he applied to the GMC,” he said.
Freeman said that Abdelrahman has an excellent academic and medical record and is held in good standing by the Sudanese Medical Council. “His work in Donegal has proceeded without incident and there are no issues surrounding his medical competency,” he said.
There are no medical competency concerns or anything of that nature.
His engagement with the Medical Council was not full and frank and does not reflect the standard expected of a doctor in Ireland.
He accepts all of that without quibble.
“This has been a chastening experience for him,” Freeman said. “There is no possibility or risk or recurrence.”
Freeman requested that his client be heard under Section 67 of the Medical Practitioners Act 2007, which in certain circumstances allows for a subject to undertake not to repeat the conduct of which he is accused.
In recognition of this, Abdelrahman would undertake to:
“On this basis (Abdelrahman) accepts the findings of the medical inquiry and accepts that his conduct has fallen below the standard expected,” Freeman said.
Counsel for the Medical Council, Eoghan O’Sullivan, said that the Council cannot accept that the inquiry be heard under section 67 due to “the seriousness of the allegations”.
“If the Council does go down this route I’ll need further instruction, but I don’t think it’s an appropriate manner in which to deal with this matter,” he said.
O’Sullivan also drew note to the fact that a book of references as to Abdelrahman’s character “make no mention of the allegations in front of the committee today”.
Following deliberation, the committee elected not to deal with the hearing under section 67 in order that it might hear the evidence of the Council’s witnesses against Abdelrahman.
With the inquiry finding Abdelrahman guilty of professional misconduct, a report will now be sent to the full Medical Council to decide on any sanctions.
Initially published 12pm
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say