Astonishingly, a UK doctor who abandoned his patient during surgery for a sexual encounter with a nurse will face no professional sanctions, raising serious questions about accountability in healthcare.
Story Snapshot
- A consultant anaesthetist left a sedated patient during surgery to engage in sexual activity with a nurse.
- The incident was witnessed and led to the doctor’s dismissal from the hospital.
- A medical tribunal ruled no further sanctions, citing “very low risk” of repeat misconduct.
- The decision has sparked concern over professional standards and patient safety.
Doctor Leaves Patient During Surgery for Sexual Encounter
On September 16, 2023, Dr Suhail Anjum, a consultant anaesthetist at Tameside Hospital in Greater Manchester, left an operating room while his patient was under general anaesthetic. He instructed a colleague to monitor the patient and proceeded to engage in sexual activity with a nurse, known publicly as Nurse C, in a nearby operating theatre. The act was interrupted when another nurse discovered the pair in a compromising situation. The patient remained unharmed, but the breach of trust and protocol quickly escalated into a full internal investigation.
The hospital’s management acted decisively, dismissing Dr Anjum in February 2024 after confirming the misconduct through their inquiry. Such behavior, especially during a critical surgical procedure, stands in stark contrast to the expectations of professionalism and patient safety that are foundational in any healthcare system. The internal report underscored the seriousness of abandoning a patient and highlighted the responsibility of medical professionals to uphold the highest standards, particularly when lives are at stake.
Tribunal Finds “Low Risk” and Imposes No Further Sanction
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) convened in September 2025 to determine Dr Anjum’s fitness to practice and whether additional disciplinary measures were warranted. Despite the gravity of the violation, the tribunal determined that Dr Anjum posed a “very low risk” of repeating the offense. The panel cited his demonstrated remorse and characterized the event as a “one-off error of judgment.” As a result, they imposed no further sanctions, leaving Dr Anjum eligible to resume his medical career in the UK. This outcome is highly unusual for such egregious misconduct within a clinical setting.
Dr Anjum, who relocated with his family to Pakistan following his dismissal, admitted deep shame and took responsibility for his actions. In statements to the tribunal, he promised the lapse would not be repeated and acknowledged the impact on his colleagues and the institution’s reputation. The MPTS emphasized his contrition and the absence of patient harm in their decision not to strike him from the medical register or impose suspension.
Impact on Trust, Standards, and Public Scrutiny
The tribunal’s decision has ignited debate about the standards of accountability in healthcare and the signals such leniency may send to both the public and medical professionals. Incidents of professional misconduct are rare but historically have resulted in suspension or removal from practice to uphold public trust. Many experts stress that zero tolerance during patient care is vital, regardless of whether immediate harm occurs. Critics argue that declining to sanction Dr Anjum could weaken institutional safeguards and diminish expectations of discipline for breaches of duty.
Hospital management and the wider NHS now face increased scrutiny over their handling of such cases and the measures in place to prevent recurrence. For patients and their families, the assurance that those entrusted with their care will not abandon their duties for personal gratification is paramount. The absence of formal penalty for Dr Anjum’s actions may prompt calls for reforms in tribunal procedures and stronger protections for patient safety in high-stakes environments.
Broader Implications and Expert Reactions
This case sets a notable precedent, potentially affecting how future incidents of professional misconduct are judged. Medical ethics specialists emphasize the balance between punishment and rehabilitation, but many see the decision as undermining hard-won standards of accountability in the healthcare sector. While some might see leniency as justified by genuine remorse and the lack of direct harm, others believe that only strict consequences can maintain public trust in vital institutions. The reputational impact on Tameside Hospital, combined with the potential for similar cases to be treated with leniency, has fueled demands for a review of monitoring and disciplinary protocols both within the UK and abroad.
Sources:
Doctor who had sex with nurse during operation won’t be sanctioned
Doctor who had sex with nurse during operation at ‘low risk’ of repeating misconduct
