Helen Webberley cleared.

I was rather assuming that she would be welcomed back with open arms to Gender GP. They've just taken on Susie Green haven't they? They are obviously in need of individuals who are prepared to practice(literally) experimental non-evidence based medicine on minors. And there seem to be an endless supply of hapless parents ready to feed their children into the gender machine.

Having said that presumably her indemnity premiums will be through the roof (if she can find anyone willing to insure her). As you say she has a criminal record AND she is practising in an extremely risky area of medicine and the indemnity companies must have clocked onto this by now. She must have cost her indemnity company a fortune!

Not necessarily. Anywhere she works in England would need CQC registration. The CQC require all doctors to have an enhanced DBS, and she has a criminal conviction. Criminal offences don't absolutely exclude employment, but they will certainly flag up on a DBS and require any employer/umbrella organisation to account for a decision to engage the clinician.

Especially as GenderGP don’t do any of the bone density monitoring stuff that GIDS insist on.

No need for caution when you are absolutely convinced that puberty blockers are 100 % safe and reversible eh? 😬

This article quotes from the judge's decision and says that it's published online, but I can't find it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/high-court-medical-practitioners-tribunal-service-justice-abergavenny-monmouthshire-b2311720.html

Congratulations Helen. Can you explain how it is ok to prescribe ‘puberty blockers’, describing them as a way of pausing puberty when there are now so many examples of the enormous harm they can do? And explain why affirmative care is an appropriate pathway when that has been discredited by the Cass review (and the study affirmative care is based on has been ripped to shreds)?

'I am simply a well-meaning, well-educated GP'

😶

OMG so now she can go back to prescribing testosterone to 12 year old girls with no restriction. What a disaster.

I'm not sure I want anyone with a criminal conviction as serious as running an illegal clinic working in the NHS.

Still got a criminal conviction though, op. Not sure any parent should be running to you for help.

In some ways it could be a good thing that she’ll now be officially responsible for prescribing again.

GenderGP have been able to operate due to a Romanian doctor (who seems to specialise in dermatology and aesthetic injectables, eg botox and fillers) and an Egyptian doctor.

When something inevitably goes tits up for a vulnerable patient, GMC will be able to have another go at getting her struck off.

The other doctors are out of reach.

Female customers on GenderGP testosterone prescriptions regularly complain online about lack of monitoring leading to late diagnosis of polycythemia and others blood related issues

See above - the GMC wanted her struck off the medical register for life.

The GMC were - and probably are still - Stonewall champions and are therefore required for such purposes to adhere to Stonewall's demands or face public criticism.

Urgh.

She was convicted of running an illegal clinic, so she still has a criminal conviction (I don't think she appealed that case).

At the same time as the prosecution for running an illegal clinic she was investigated for prescribing testosterone to girls as young as 12. She admits to that in this BBC article.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-41213534

So if she is now cleared to practise again, can she go back to prescribing opposite-sex hormones to children?

This is not the GMC's fault (for once). Read Webberley's statement:

The GMC’s case was that I should be erased from the medical register and not be able to work as a doctor again.

Due to their general uselessness, the GMC have had the power to erase doctors from the medical register removed from them. These decisions are now made by an independent tribunal. It's similar to a court - the GMC presents its case like the prosecution in a court case, and the doctor's lawyers present her defence.

The tribunal has its own biases, like all judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, but it is genuinely independent of the GMC. Tribunal decisions often go against the GMC.

In this case, the GMC wanted Webberley struck off for life, but the Tribunal said no.

How grim.

Is this the GMC?

Does she still have her criminal conviction?

And the rest of us recognise the GMC is not fit for purpose and makes unfair, irrational decisions especially against BAME doctors.

Amongst the GPs I know and wider professional circles the words ‘barge’ and ‘pole’ frequently come up whenever GenderGP is mentioned.

They’re not afraid of trying to coerce GPs who refuse them by sending letters talking about duty of care to patients, risk of mental health issues and suicide on trans people and actually have the nerve to quote GMC edicts at them too.

That is hideous. How is this woman considered fit to practice?

Ghoul

Well done, Dr Frankenstein.