Skip to content

Archive site notice

You are viewing an archived copy of Christian Concern's website. Some features are disabled and pages may not display properly.

To view our current site, please visit

Christian GP found guilty of "malpractice" for sharing his faith

Printer-friendly version

The General Medical Council’s Investigation Committee has today (14 June) reprimanded a Christian doctor for sharing his faith with a patient at the end of a private consultation.

The GMC has ruled that his actions ‘did not meet the standards required of a doctor’. Dr Richard Scott has now been issued with a Warning which will remain on his record for five years.

The National Secular Society encouraged the proceedings and handed transcripts of evidence to the GMC, detailing Dr Scott’s appearances on radio and television where he had defended himself.

Dr Scott, who has been a doctor for over 28 years, was initially investigated by the GMC after it received a complaint from a patient that Dr Scott had discussed the benefits of Christianity with him.

The GMC proceeded with the case despite the fact that the patient refused to give evidence in person.

No cross-examination

Dr Scott, represented by Human Rights Barrister Paul Diamond, and supported by the Christian Legal Centre, argued that the case should be ‘Struck Out’, as a proper and fair hearing could not take place if Mr Diamond was not able to cross-examine the patient in person.

However, the GMC ruled that the patient’s evidence could be given over the telephone and in secret - an extraordinary procedure - meaning that Dr Scott’s defence team were denied an adequate opportunity to assess the patient’s responses.

In his evidence, the patient was unclear about how long his consultation with Dr Scott had lasted, yet he maintained that he was offered no medical options, but was told that belief in Jesus Christ was the only way that his suffering would be relieved.

However, Dr Scott testified that he had provided medical options, but raised his faith because he believed it could help the patient. Dr Scott claims that when he asked whether he could discuss faith, his patient said ‘Go for it’.

The GMC preferred the patient’s evidence over Dr Scott’s.


Dr Scott said: 

“I’m deeply upset at this decision by my professional body.

“My professional reputation has been compromised and I have been disciplined, just for sharing my Christian views - yet it is recognised by many peer-reviewed articles that faith can help unwell people.

“My barrister was not given the opportunity to cross-examine the complainant face to face and for the case to be tried in this way is plainly wrong.

“The GMC has taken two years to drag this case out knowing that the complainant would never show up.

“I will be seeking further legal advice as to a Judicial review of the GMC’s handling of its disciplinary procedures, as the amateur and unjust way this trial is being conducted is an insult to me and to every member of the medical profession.”

Andrea Williams, CEO of the Christian Legal Centre, said:

“I am appalled by this decision. Many doctors will be deeply concerned with the way this case has been handled by the GMC. Why was the evidence heard in secret?”

“Our society seems to becoming more and more repressive, with ordinary, decent people being reported to the authorities and disciplined, not for committing any crime, but just for expressing their Christian beliefs.”


Case File: Dr Richard Scott

Christian Concern: Religious Freedom