Dr. Sarah Benn, a former General Practitioner (GP) in Birmingham, United Kingdom, has been suspended from practicing medicine for five months for her repeated participation in climate action protests. The suspension was imposed by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) on Tuesday, following a hearing that considered Dr. Benn’s fitness to practice in light of her misconduct.
Dr. Benn, who had already stopped practicing in 2022, admitted to breaching an interim injunction by attending the demonstrations, an action that amounted to contempt of court. Despite this acknowledgment, she maintained that as a doctor, she had a moral duty to take action to protect life and health, emphasizing the urgency of addressing the climate crisis.
Dr. Benn’s suspension has sparked concerns within the medical community, with the British Medical Association (BMA) expressing that the ruling sends a worrying message to other doctors who share her concerns about climate change. The BMA’s representative body chairwoman and workforce lead, Dr. Latifa Patel, stated that Dr. Benn’s actions posed no threat to patients, and that her suspension implies otherwise.
The MPTS operates independently from the General Medical Council (GMC), and its hearings focus on cases where the GMC is concerned that patient safety or public confidence in doctors may be at risk. MPTS tribunals have the authority to impose conditions on a doctor’s practice or even prohibit them from working in the UK.
In response to the suspension, the GMC clarified that while Dr. Benn has the right to express her personal opinions, her referral for a misconduct hearing stemmed from multiple breaches of a court order that resulted in a custodial sentence. The GMC emphasized that its investigations consider cases where doctors have broken the law, regardless of their motivations.
Dr. Benn’s misconduct hearing did not raise any issues regarding her clinical work. However, the tribunal concluded that her repeated actions outside the law impaired her fitness to practice and warranted a suspension. The tribunal’s decision was intended to reflect the seriousness of Dr. Benn’s misconduct and send a message to the profession and the public about the expected behavior of registered doctors.
Dr. Benn’s suspension highlights the complex intersection of professional ethics, civil disobedience, and the urgency of addressing the climate crisis. It remains to be seen how this case will impact the medical community’s response to climate activism and the broader debate on the role of doctors in advocating for public health and environmental protection.
