Renowned Edinburgh psychiatrist ‘fabricated’ patient claims, tribunal finds

Dr Jane McLennan is based at the Royal Edinburgh Hospital
Dr Jane McLennan is based at the Royal Edinburgh Hospital
0
Have your say

A RENOWNED Psychiatrist produced an “inaccurate and misleading” report on a patient who went on to lose an unfair dismissal claim against the Ministry of Justice, a tribunal has found.

Dr Jane McLennan, based at the Royal Edinburgh Hospital, faces suspension after falsely claiming that the man, known as ‘Mr A’, had cursed throughout the one hour 48 minute evaluation and told her that he kept taped conversations with “girning” customers while working as a call handler at the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) in Glasgow.

Dr McLennan, 57, also testified under oath that Mr A claimed he “felt like hitting people at work,” at an employment tribunal in January 2015.

However, she was unaware that Mr A had secretly recorded the consultation on his phone and later reported her to the General Medical Council (GMC), after failing to convince prosecutors in Scotland to investigate.

Mr A was pursuing a disability discrimination claim against his former employers at CICA and Dr McLennan had been hired to carry out a psychiatric evaluation of the claimant.

The former calls handler had been dismissed for gross misconduct in May 2013, but claimed the complaints against him had been fabricated by colleagues and managers who had victimised him for whistleblowing.

Dr McLennan’s solicitors tried to block the evidence from being heard after branding Mr A a conspiracy theorist, but Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal Service (MPTS) rejected their arguments, describing the former Ministry of Justice employee as a “reliable witness”.

In its determination on the case, the MPTS found Dr McLennan “had taken a dislike to Mr A” after she reported feeling intimidated and bullied by him.

Their report read: “Dr McLennan’s actions breached a fundamental tenet of the medical profession, namely the requirement to act with honesty and integrity.

“Dr McLennan’s integrity was further damaged by the fact that she then gave evidence at an Employment Tribunal which was dishonest. This tribunal considered that fellow professionals would find Dr McLennan’s actions deplorable.”

The tribunal service said: “Dr McLennan’s report had the potential to have a significant impact on Mr A, by misleading the Employment Tribunal in determining his claim for unfair dismissal.

“It will also have been very difficult and frustrating for Mr A to have read Dr McLennan’s misleading report.”

The tribunal concluded that Dr McLennan’s fitness to practise is impaired as a result of dishonesty. She will likely face at least a temporary suspension.