Doctor struck off after ‘sexually motivated’ misconduct
PUBLISHED: 08:14 13 July 2020 | UPDATED: 10:17 14 July 2020
This content is subject to copyright.
A married doctor who had sex with two patients after going through hospital records to get their phone numbers has been struck off.
Dr Christopher Uzodike, who worked at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, took the phone numbers of two patients after they had visited the A&E department in 2016.
In a report, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal found many of the allegations made against Dr Uzodike were proved and concluded his actions were “sexually motivated” and “planned, repeated and sustained”.
The tribunal determined that Dr Uzodike had taken the phone numbers with the view to initiate contact and which he hoped would lead to a sexual relationship.
A report of the tribunal said: “The tribunal has found proved that Dr Uzodike had sexual intercourse with both Patient A and Patient B therefore it determined that his actions in taking their numbers from the medical records was sexually motivated.”
Dr Uzodike met patient A when she attended A&E in June 2016 contacting her via WhatsApp later that evening. The tribunal found he engaged in an emotional and sexual relationship with patient A until April 2018.
In September 2016, patient B attended A&E and he sent her messages of a personal nature, later that month meeting her for a drink and had sex.
The report noted the doctor had previous good character and had attended a maintaining professional boundaries course but Ms Kathryn Johnson, counsel for the General Medical Council, said she felt there remained a risk of repetition.
In a statement to the tribunal dated July 6, 2020, Dr Uzodike said: “Life is all about choices and regrettably, these were the bad choices that I made. I feel ashamed of my behaviour and how I let this happen.
”I have let so many people down, I let the patients down, I lost the confidence of the public in the profession, I let my hardworking colleagues down.
“I deeply regret what I did, and I am extremely remorseful. I cannot turn the hand of time, but I have taken steps and will continue to do so to make sure that the risk of a future occurrence is eliminated.”
Representing Dr Uzodike was Mr Gledhill who said erasure would be inappropriate and have a disproportionate impact on the doctor and his family financially.
The report said: “Given its findings, the tribunal determined that a lesser sanction than erasure would not sufficiently protect the public, maintain public confidence in the profession and uphold proper professional standards for members of the profession.”
If you value what this story gives you, please consider supporting the Norwich Evening News. Click the link in the orange box above for details.