Allegation of falsifying education and training history

In this inquiry, an NCHD applied for a job as an SHO in a general hospital. In his application he made false claims about his training and experience. He claimed:-

  • He was employed as an SHO in a general practice for approximately 8 months;
  • He was employed as an SHO in a hospital overseas for 2 years prior to his position in the general practice mentioned above.

The general hospital advertised 2 posts and shortlisted 20 applications and interviewed the applicants. During his interview for the SHO post he did not clarify that he was only a clinical observer in the general practice and the overseas hospital. Following interview he was offered a 3 year contract as an SHO. He commenced work with the general hospital shortly thereafter.

Generally a clinical/medical observer or a clinical attachment are positions held by someone in a pre-training position and are seeking simply to witness and be present for medical procedures. They are not usually paid positions and involve no clinical input.

He commenced working in a rotational scheme under the supervision of a consultant. During the initial supervised rotation concerns were raised regarding the extent to which the NCHD’s ability matched his stated clinical experience. He was asked to attend a meeting which included his clinical supervisor and the general hospital’s manpower manager. During the meeting the NCHD admitted his previous positions were in fact as medical observer.

The hospital then made a complaint to the Medical Council. A Fitness to Practise Committee (FTPC) inquiry was convened under Part 8 of the Medical Practitioners Act, 2007 and was heard in public.

The NCHD admitted that his conduct amounted to professional misconduct and the FTPC also took into account that he resigned from his post in the general hospital and that he will encounter difficulties with his professional career given the findings of professional misconduct. The FTPC recommended that the Medical Council admonish the NCHD in relation to his conduct and behaviour.

Subsequently the Medical Council took into account the admission of professional misconduct and admonished the NCHD in relation to his professional conduct.