Patient recall lawyers withdraw from hearing – BBC News

Lawyers for a doctor at the center of Northern Ireland’s biggest patient recall have withdrawn from his new hearing practice.

Michael Watt’s legal representatives said they were “concerned about his serious mental health problem”.

They told the Medical Practice Tribunal Service that continuing the hearing in public “presents a real risk to his mental health”.

A new form of hearing practice began in September.

The legal team also formally withdrew an application to the court to have Michael Watt removed from the medical register.

This followed a High Court ruling earlier this year overturning a decision by which he was voluntarily removed from the medical register.

The previous hearing took place behind closed doors while the new one is now public.

A defense lawyer said he was not prepared to represent him at the public hearing, in the interest of Michael Watt and the public.

The court was told it understood the case could continue uncontested in his absence.

Charles Garside KC, who represents the General Medical Council (GMC), said the court can be confident that the lawyers who withdrew will have had “appropriate and necessary discussions with Dr Watt before making the decision”.

He said: “The doctor made a fully informed decision” of the possible implications.

The court is now considering whether it is fair for the public hearing to continue in his absence.

Mr Garside KC said the panel should consider fairness to the practitioner, the public and the GMC.

“The public interest demands that these proceedings be processed as quickly as possible,” he said.

The hearing continues Friday.

It is examining whether Michael Watt’s fitness to practice is impaired by “deficient professional performance” following a general medical performance assessment in which his practice was found unacceptable in five areas.

The court is investigating the allegation that between October 7 and 22, 2018, Michael Watt underwent an assessment by the General Medical Council regarding the level of his professional performance.

It is alleged that this performance was unacceptable in the areas of maintaining professional performance, assessment, clinical management, record keeping and patient relations.