A doctor who held an NHS nurse by the throat and demanded her phone number has been suspended.
Dr. Mubashsher Muhammed, who worked in an emergency department in Stockport, was berated for his ‘regrettable’ sexual harassment towards two colleagues.
The incidents, which took place in early 2021, involved one being told to remove his mask to “see his face” and repeatedly touching the other’s face covering, as well as inappropriate “massaging” and squeezing.
But the most serious incident involved a ‘frightening ordeal’ in which married Dr Muhammed found one of the nurses alone near the female staff’s changing room.
He put his hand on her throat and held her back against a wall as he said ‘when are you going to admit and give me your number’.
Dr. Mubashsher Muhammed was suspended as a doctor for 9 months after he sexually assaulted two nurses at an NHS emergency room in Stockport.
A medical tribunal panel has suspended Czech-trained Dr. Muhammed for nine months for his “sexually motivated” conduct.
Dr. Muhammed, who described himself as a ‘tangible individual’, defended his actions as consistent with a culture of ‘chatter’ in the department, and that he had wanted to ‘fit in’.
The incidents involving both nurses took place in April 2021 in the emergency department of Stepping Hill Hospital, part of Stockport NHS Foundation Trust.
Dr. Muhammed, who also works at private hair transplant clinic Precision Hair Clinic in Macclesfield, Cheshire, was temporarily employed by the trust to bolster its workforce.
One of the nurses, described in the tribunal documents as ‘Nurse A’, spoke of her feeling of ‘fear’ when she saw Dr.
In a written statement, she added: “As I proceeded to the women’s locker room, he stood in front of me and put his hand around my throat, my back was against the wall at this point.
“I flinched, he didn’t, and with his hand still around my throat he said, ‘when are you going to give in and give me your number?’
She added how the incident left her stunned and shocked.
Nurse A also described how she knew she had to report the incident, but waited three months for fear that she would not be believed and that this would get her into trouble professionally.
The tribunal accepted that the incident had occurred but added that it was an ‘opportunistic’ event and not premeditated on the part of Dr Muhammed.
‘Nurse B’ also described her own similar run-ins with Dr Muhammed, including how he had massaged her shoulders, pinched her waist and laughed at her pleas to stop.
She shared how even mentioning Dr. Muhammed’s wife was not enough to stop the inappropriate touching.
Dr. Muhammed claimed in his defense that Nurse B’s claims were fabricated by her after he rejected her advances. But the claim was deemed ‘unlikely’ by the tribunal.
The tribunal also highlighted how both nurses had told Dr Muhammed to stop the behaviour, but he had treated the requests as a joke.
However, both nurses acknowledged that there was a culture of ‘chat’ on the ward.
The tribunal said, without commenting on whether such a “banter” culture in the workplace was appropriate or not, but that Dr.
Dr. Muhammed stopped working for the Trust when the nurses raised the alarm about his behaviour.
In a written statement, he apologized for behavior that led to his colleagues’ discomfort and for going too far.
He added that he later acknowledged that his actions were wrong.
In a ‘frightening incident’ at Stepping Hill Hospital (pictured), married Dr Muhammed held a nurse’s throat and demanded her phone number
The UK medical regulator, the General Medical Council (GMC), which brought the case against Dr Muhammed, argued that a temporary suspension of their register, effectively excluding him from his work as a doctor, was the most appropriate course of action.
A GMC representative argued that Dr Muhammed had subjected one of the nurses to a “terrifying ordeal outside the locker room” and that his behavior amounted to serious misconduct.
But Dr Muhammed’s representative argued that the incident was a ‘short-lived’ and ‘isolated incident’ where Nurse A suffered no physical harm.
His defense also said that Dr Muhammed had since taken courses on ‘professional boundaries’.
In a reflective piece submitted to the tribunal, Dr Muhammed wrote: ‘I will immediately limit contact to clinical only and avoid any form of banter, comments on the appearance of others and any form of unwanted contact.’
Dr. Muhammed also described himself as a ‘tangible individual’, but promised to reassure colleagues only verbally and not through touch in the future.
His representative added that no patient had been sexually harassed and that Dr Muhammed did not touch the nurses’ breasts or “below their waists,” making it the “lower end of the scale of seriousness of sexual misconduct.”
He also urged the tribunal to take into account that Dr Muhammed was his family’s main breadwinner when determining the sanction.
In their ruling, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service denounced Dr Muhammed’s conduct.
“This was behavior that any professional would know was completely unacceptable,” they wrote.
“Indeed, it could easily be called deplorable.”
But the tribunal noted that his conduct, while serious, only took place over a two-month period.
They also pointed to 53 testimonials from colleagues, the majority of them female, who spoke positively of his character.
The tribunal also said that while the case was ongoing, Dr Muhammed had continued to work as a doctor for two years without further incident.
They also considered the fact that this sexual harassment involved no contact with the nurses’ “sexual parts,” his participation in a boundary-enforcing course, and depriving the public of a “good doctor” in their decision .
However, they add that this does not detract from the seriousness of the behavior described.
“The incident outside the changing rooms was particularly shocking,” they wrote. “He caused Nurse A to get scared.
She was clearly vulnerable and feared the consequences of filing a complaint.
“He had seriously undermined the reputation of the medical profession as a whole.”
They describe their decision as “finely balanced between suspension and expulsion” and opted for the former.
The tribunal said the suspension would make the seriousness of the misconduct clear to both him and the wider profession and give the doctor time to understand his actions.
He has 28 days from the verdict to appeal against the decision.
Dr. Muhammed, through his representatives, the Medical Protection Society, told MailOnline: “I am disappointed with the tribunal’s findings and will take the time to reflect on the outcome and consider my options.”
Stockport NHS Foundation Trust said: ‘We do not tolerate sexual harassment and we take all allegations of such harassment extremely seriously.’
Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, where Dr Muhammed has worked since 2019, told this website that he no longer works there.
Precision Hair Clinic did not respond to requests for comment.