'Misconduct' medic can return to work

A consultant obstetrician at Sligo General Hospital who was found guilty of professional misconduct over his treatment of three women over a two-year period is fit to practise and may return to work, the High Court has decided.

The Medical Council had urged the court to attach conditions, including ongoing medical supervision, to any return to work by Dr Victor Moore. However, Mr Justice Michael Hanna said that while he believed this was a "most appropriate" case to issue recommendations, he has no power to do so under the Medical Practitioners Act. There might be a good reason for not empowering a court to make such recommendations, he added.

Mr Justice Hanna yesterday upheld findings by the Medical Council that Dr Moore, Kilwarlin Avenue, Hillsborough, Co Down, was guilty of professional misconduct regarding his treatment of three patients, including a finding that he had wrongly removed the womb of a 71-year-old woman arising from his failure to confirm his incorrect suspicion she had cancer.

The judge overturned a finding of professional misconduct relating to a fourth woman.

However, Mr Justice Hanna also ruled, on the basis of psychiatric evidence, that Dr Moore is now fit to practise medicine. In light of that finding, Dr Moore's constitutional right to earn a livelihood and all the circumstances of the case, the judge said he would cancel the council's decision to strike his name off the medical register.

He noted a consultant psychiatrist had recommended a phased return to work with fewer demands on Dr Moore, who had complained about working for eight months without leave and being on call six days a week.

The judge said he expected Dr Moore would adhere to the psychiatric recommendations and that Sligo General Hospital would facilitate him.

The Medical Council had deemed Dr Moore unfit to practise medicine by reason of physical and mental disability but Mr Justice Hanna ruled that Dr Moore, who has undergone treatment over the past two years, is now fit to practise. The judge stressed the question of unfitness to practice has to be decided at the date of hearing of the legal proceedings.

The court had heard evidence from psychiatrists that Dr Moore had in June 2004 reported sleep and concentration disturbance and feeling he was being pushed beyond the limit, that his employer had treated him cruelly and had placed unreasonable demands on him. In early 2005, the psychiatric view was that Dr Moore was unfit to practise.

In April 2006, Dr Moore was reported to be considerably improved, actively involved in appropriate therapy and continuing to take medication. At that point, he was deemed fit to work.

Yesterday, in his reserved judgment on the challenge by Dr Moore to his proposed removal from the register of medical doctors, Mr Justice Hanna upheld the findings of professional misconduct against Dr Moore in the case of three patients.