Victims call for ‘co-conspirators’ to be held to account after rogue surgeon exaggerated cancer risk to make patients go under the knife

Victims of a rogue breast surgeon who left hundreds of patients disfigured after carrying out needless operations have called for “co-conspirators” to be held to account, accusing them of turning a blind eye to the malpractice.

On the day that consultant surgeon Ian Stuart Paterson, 59, was sentenced to 15 years in prison, victims vowed to continue to fight for compensation and called for private healthcare providers to put “patients before profits”. Lawyers for hundreds of additional victims have called for new laws to give private patients the same protection provided by the NHS.

Paterson was convicted last month of 17 counts of wounding with intent at Nottingham crown court, relating to nine women and one man. He was also convicted of three further wounding charges. But it is believed that his victims number in the hundreds.

Jurors at the seven-week trial decided the surgeon carried out “extensive, life-changing operations for no medically justifiable reason” on the 10 patients between 1997 and 2011, while many victims needlessly lived under the shadow of cancer for many years.

The jury heard that Paterson regularly “miscoded” procedures, charging for more expensive treatment. He was accused of carrying out the often pointless surgery for “obscure motives”, which may have included a desire to earn extra money.



As the sentence was read out, Paterson – wearing a dark jacket, striped shirt and red tie – repeatedly shook his head.

The court heard that one of Paterson’s victims, Leanne Joseph, had to take out two loans from her family to pay for procedures that the surgeon falsely told her were necessary. As a result of the surgery, Paterson told her she was unable to breastfeed. “[She] found the inability to breastfeed her baby very difficult,” said the judge, Jeremy Baker. “The long-term psychological effects have been particularly pernicious.”



Dr Rosemary Platt stayed under Paterson for eight years. After one operation she lost a significant amount of blood and had to have fluid drained from under her arm. Another victim, John Ingram, continues to endure persistent pain as a result of unnecessary surgery. To applause from the public gallery, Ingram said in an impact statement that Paterson was a “criminal” who had commited “grotesque [and] violent acts”.

Addressing the surgeon, Baker said his arrogance led him to think he was “untouchable, and that no one would dare to question your authority”. That had “contributed to the complete lack of remorse which you have shown for your offending”, he added.

Paterson was employed by the Heart of England NHS trust in 1998 despite having previously been suspended from Good Hope hospital in Sutton Coldfield, Birmingham. He also practised at Spire Healthcare hospitals in the Midlands over a 13-year period.



The NHS has already been forced to pay out almost £10m in compensation to more than 250 of Paterson’s patients. But the disgraced surgeon could have as many as 1,000 additional victims, among them hundreds of Spire patients who may never be compensated. Since his conviction, more than 120 more former patients have come forward.

Victims have called for a public inquiry to fully expose the extent of Paterson’s malpractice and the systems that allowed it to continue despite repeated warnings.



“This is only the end of the criminal battle. The civil battle continues,” said Linda Millband of Thompsons Solicitors, which represents many of the victims. “We have launched a campaign ‘patients before profits’ to get the protections that already exist in the NHS introduced in the private sector.”

Ian Paterson: the 'likeable' breast surgeon who wounded his patients Read more

A number of Paterson’s former patients have died since being treated by him. For several years before the trial, concerns were raised about his practice of carrying out “cleavage-saving mastectomies”, a controversial operation that left breast tissue behind after the removal of cancerous cells. This method meant that the chances of a relapse within five years doubled.

Speaking on the steps of the court, Diane Green, who was not a named victim in the trial but underwent such a procedure at Paterson’s hands, said others who worked with the surgeon now needed to be investigated. “He has been stopped, but we need to look to those who were co-conspirators, who let this go on, who saw this happening and said nothing,” she said.



“I lost my home, I lost my marriage, I lost my health, I lost my job, I lost absolutely everything. He took everything away from me. This has been going on since the 90s and only today have I got justice. He took away my youth.”

West Midlands police said they had investigated those linked to Paterson, but that further charges would be considered only if fresh information came to light.

John Ingram said: “I think there was a big space in the dock. Mr Paterson was in there on his own. There are some people who think there should have been a corporate entity in that dock, and that is the corporate entity that allowed him to carry out this dreadful system within their building.”

Pamela Jain, CPS specialist prosecutor, said Paterson had abused one of the most important relationships in society, the trust between patient and doctor. “The impact of Paterson’s actions on his victims has been devastating, from the unnecessary distress of undergoing procedures they did not need, to the scars that will always serve as a physical reminder of what [he] did to them.”

Following the conviction, the Royal College of Surgeons called for a review of safety standards in the private sector and said unexpected deaths and safety fears in private hospitals should be made more transparent.



The NHS has so far paid out around £18m including £9.5m in damages, settling 256 cases, with 25 outstanding. Hundreds of Paterson’s private patients may never see a penny after his insurance company, the Medical Defence Union, said its cover was “discretionary” and had been withdrawn.

Spire Healthcare, which runs Parkway and Little Aston hospitals where Paterson practised, has settled some cases, but argue that as Paterson was not technically their employee, they are not responsible for his actions. The company would not provide any details about the compensation paid. After the sentenced was passed down, a Spire spokesman said the company was “truly sorry for the distress caused to Paterson’s victims”.

“What Mr Paterson did in our hospitals, in other private hospitals and in the NHS absolutely should not have happened and the sentence handed down today reflects the gravity of the crimes he committed.”

A civil case with seven test cases, which will determine to what extent Spire, the Heart of England NHS Trust and Paterson can be held liable, is scheduled to be heard in October.

Spire said it had “been responding responsibly and with all due urgency ever since these matters first came to light … We would be concerned at any failure by the MDU to stand behind their member.”

Concerns about Paterson were raised as far back as 2003, but despite several internal and external investigations and complaints from patients, GPs and other surgeons, the General Medical Council did not suspend him until 2011.

Charlie Massey, chief executive and registrar of the GMC, said the medical world was now “fundamentally different”, but added: “It is absolutely right that questions are asked about how this happened and more crucially how the health system can prevent it from happening again.”

Timeline

1998 Paterson is hired as a consultant surgeon at the Heart of England NHS trust, despite having been suspended from Good Hope hospital. He also sees private patients at Spire Healthcare hospitals of Little Aston and Parkway.

2003 He is investigated because of concerns about “cleavage-sparing” mastectomies. Recommendations are not followed through.

2007 Breast surgeon Hemant Ingle is appointed and is among several to raise concerns. Further investigations are carried out and Paterson is told to stop performing cleavage-sparing mastectomies. Mark Goldman, the chief executive of the Heart of England NHS trust, informs Spire that it is investigating Paterson.

2008 Two GPs complain about Paterson’s treatment of a patient, saying he gave misleading information about pathology reports, overtreated patients and disregarded the multidisciplinary team meeting process. Another report is also critical.

2009 A Spire Parkway patient makes a formal complaint about Paterson. No action is taken. Heart of England NHS trust recalls 12 patients who have had cleavage-sparing mastectomies. West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit submits two further reports.

2010 The GMC tells Spire Parkway executives about a complaint from an NHS patient.

2011 Parkway are informed that Paterson carried out a cleavage-sparing mastectomy in 2009 after being told to stop in January 2008. A month later, the GMC informed Spire about another patient complaint. A recall of all Paterson’s patients begins.

Paterson is suspended by the NHS in May but continues to perform breast surgery for Spire until 31 May and general surgery until 8 June. He is paid until November 2012.

2017 Paterson is found guilty of 17 counts of wounding with intent, relating to nine women and one man. He is also convicted of three further wounding charges.