Formal complaint
A month later, I received notification from the Irish Medical Council
(IMC) that I was being investigated in relation to a complaint about my
authorship of the RCOG AVB guideline. The complaint was personal in
nature and questioned my fitness to practice. I was accused of
“mysognistic attitudes towards patients (sic) ”, and of showing
“extreme disrespect, contempt and paternalism towards
patients” . This complainant had never been under my care, had never
met me in person, and appeared to reside outside Ireland. I contacted
the RCOG and my co-authors in the UK. The RCOG recognised the wider
implications of guideline authorship being challenged in this way and
engaged directly with the GMC who agreed to put in place measures to
protect its members. The RCOG attempted to engage with the IMC on my
behalf but to no avail. In contrast to my UK colleagues, I had to
participate in a process lasting eight months before I was finally
informed by the council that they had “formed the opinion that
there was not sufficient cause to warrant further action being taken in
relation to the complaint ”. This protracted process was time-consuming
and disturbing. I have no doubt that it was designed to intimidate me
and ultimately to deter me from participating in future guideline
development. The IMC have since implemented changes to their procedures
with the CEO and an “authorised officer” now screening complaints
rather than direct referral to the preliminary proceedings committee as
occurred in my case. This may limit future complaints of this type
receiving undue attention.