A junior doctor has been suspended for a year after lying to the NHS, claiming she was attending a training day when she was actually getting married. Dr Preethi Suresh, a cardiology trainee, was caught out after dishonestly filling out forms and uploading a certificate to her professional portfolio.
Deception Uncovered
Her deception was uncovered by an eagle-eyed supervisor who noted that Dr Suresh was booked on leave, not training. While admitting to the lie, Dr Suresh claimed she hit the panic button due to being in a chaotic state of mind and concerned about meeting her training day requirements.
Hearing and Suspension
Following a hearing, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal determined that Dr Suresh had committed serious misconduct, leading to her 12-month suspension. Dr Suresh qualified as a doctor at Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences in India in 2016. At the time of the incident, she was working as a postgraduate doctor in the cardiology training programme at Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.
She had booked leave between 26 February and 1 March 2024 for her upcoming wedding. The training courses were part of the Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) process, and trainees were informed that attendance at about 60 per cent of sessions was expected.
The Incident
On 29 February, a training day was held, and two QR codes were made available via WhatsApp for people to register attendance and leave feedback. Dr Suresh filled out both forms and uploaded the certificate to her portfolio, saying she had completed the training day. Consultant cardiologist at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Professor Vassilios Vassiliou, realised that Dr Suresh had claimed to have attended the day through her portfolio, but he had not seen her. He asked her about this, and she admitted that she had lied about being at the training day. She said she immediately knew it was wrong and stated that she had been in a chaotic state of mind leading up to her wedding. She then removed the certificate from her portfolio.
Evidence and Testimony
Giving evidence at the hearing, Dr Suresh said she had struggled to attend training sessions because she had been on-call and had tried to attend after doing night shifts but this had left her exhausted. She said that she wrongly believed she needed to achieve around 70 per cent attendance at training days and thought, based on her own calculation, that she was falling short. It turned out she was actually well above the required attendance at the time and just needed to ask for clarification.
The tribunal chair, Emma Gilberthorpe, said: '[Dr Suresh] described her actions as seriously dishonest but said that, when she carried them out, it felt like a single act aimed at obtaining the certificate, rather than a series of separate actions. She accepted that this did not excuse her conduct.' Dr Suresh accepted that her actions were dishonest and that there would be understandable scepticism given her previous MPT warning for dishonesty. She said she understood why colleagues, supervisors and the Tribunal might question whether she could be trusted in future. She stated that one dishonest act could damage years of trust and reputation. She said that, in both instances, she had pressed the panic button and had taken a dishonest short-term option rather than pausing, thinking properly and seeking support. She accepted full responsibility and said she was not seeking to blame colleagues, the training programme, her wedding or any other external factor.
GMC Representation
A representative of the General Medical Council said that Dr Suresh's actions were done intentionally and for professional benefit. The hearing placed her misconduct in the highest level of seriousness, and she was suspended for 12 months, with a review hearing at the end of her suspension.
Ms Gilberthorpe said: 'The Tribunal considered that there were several dishonest acts within the incident itself, which occurred in a workplace setting. The Tribunal accepted that Dr Suresh did not ultimately derive the benefit she sought because the conduct was identified before it could progress further. However, it considered that the potential benefit was significant. At the time she acted, Dr Suresh believed the Certificate and attendance record were important for meeting training requirements and intended to rely upon them if necessary. The Tribunal considered that her intention was to deceive in order to secure a professional advantage connected to her training progression.'
The Tribunal took into account Dr Suresh’s personal circumstances at the time, including the pressures associated with her upcoming wedding. However, it agreed with the GMC’s submission that these circumstances did not sufficiently mitigate the seriousness of the dishonesty. The Tribunal considered that Dr Suresh appeared susceptible to personal stress and accepted that she had been working hard and under pressure. Nevertheless, it concluded that the personal stressors identified did not justify or materially lessen the seriousness of the conduct. The Tribunal concluded that there is a risk to patient safety because dishonest conduct occurring within a professional context could undermine trust in professional records, training systems and clinical practice.
