A British anaesthetist admitted to abandoning a patient under anaesthetic during an operation in order to engage in sexual activity with a nurse. Despite acknowledging the misconduct, the practitioner has been allowed to continue working in his profession.
Incident and Admission
On September 16, 2023, Consultant Anaesthetist Dr. Suhail Anjum was accused of departing from the operating theatre while a male patient was unconscious. He allegedly went to have sex with a nurse elsewhere on the hospital grounds. A colleague intervened, discovering Dr. Anjum and the nurse in what was described during the tribunal as a “compromising position.” The nurse reportedly had her trousers lowered to her knees and her underwear exposed, while Dr. Anjum was seen appearing to adjust the cord of his trousers. During the hearing, it was established that Dr. Anjum had told the court he left for approximately eight minutes under the pretext of taking a comfort break. He did not contest the facts and admitted to engaging in the sexual act, while also stating that he believed the nurse was “likely to be nearby” when he exited the operating room.
Acknowledgments, Risk, and Personal Circumstances
Dr. Anjum confessed that his actions may have placed the patient at risk. However, representatives from the medical regulatory body stated that the patient did not suffer harm, and that the surgery proceeded without further incident while under the supervision of another medic. He also explained that, at the time, he was undergoing a difficult period. His daughter had been born prematurely in January, an event he described as “stressful,” and it had adversely affected his mental health and his connection with his wife. He characterized the act as a “one-off error of judgment” and emphasised it would not be repeated.
Findings of the Tribunal
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service judged the conduct to be “serious misconduct,” describing it as “inappropriate behaviour” falling well below the expected professional standards. Despite such determination, the tribunal concluded that Dr. Anjum posed a “very low risk” of reoffending. As a result, no suspension or removal of his medical registration was ordered. The panel did consider imposing a warning, pending reconvening. The tribunal chair noted that Dr. Anjum had shown sufficient remorse, insight, and remediation to satisfy concerns regarding public safety. It was judged that his fitness to practise was not impaired.
Reflections and Apology
In his statements, Dr. Anjum expressed deep regret, saying he had “let down everybody” — including the patient, his colleagues, and his own ethical standards. He described the situation as shameful, and repeatedly apologised. He recognised the breach of trust and the unusual nature of his actions, admitting he wished he could reverse them. Despite being married and father to three children, he acknowledged that the pressures in his personal life had contributed to the lapse. He accepted full responsibility, saying that he had only himself to blame.
Conclusion
The case highlights the delicate balance between holding medical professionals accountable and recognising when a mistake, while serious, does not justify ending a career. Dr. Anjum’s situation has sparked debate about professionalism, trust, and patient safety, but the tribunal’s decision reflects a belief in rehabilitation and proportionality. While his actions will remain a serious blemish on his record, his willingness to accept responsibility and demonstrate remorse played a significant role in allowing him to continue serving as a doctor. This outcome serves as both a warning to others in the medical field and a reminder that even those who commit serious errors can be given a chance to rebuild trust.
