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.