Kristan Jotin VEDI

‘Between February 2020 and June 2023, Dr Vedi formed a personal relationship with Ms A and gave Ms A money towards a medical device that she required, sent a number of messages and images to her via Facebook messenger and/or another messaging platform. He also met with Ms A on two or more occasions, when it was inappropriate to do so. At all material times, Ms A was a former patient whom Dr Vedi knew to be vulnerable due to her mental health. This conduct does not meet with the standards required of a doctor. It risks bringing the profession into disrepute and it must not be repeated. The required standards are set out in Good Medical Practice and associated guidance. In this case, paragraphs 53 and 65 of Good Medical Practice (2013) were particularly relevant: 53 You must not use your professional position to pursue a sexual or improper emotional relationship with a patient or someone close to them. 65 You must make sure that your conduct justifies your patients’ trust in you and the public’s trust in the profession.

The following paragraphs of the Maintaining a professional boundary between you and your patient (April 2013) were also particularly relevant: “8 Personal relationships with former patients may also be inappropriate depending on factors such as: a the length of time since the professional relationship ended (see paragraphs 9–10) b the nature of the previous professional relationship c whether the patient was particularly vulnerable at the time of the professional relationship, and whether they are still vulnerable (see paragraphs 11–13) … 11 Some patients may be more vulnerable than others and the more vulnerable someone is, the more likely it is that having a relationship with them would be an abuse of power and your position as a doctor. 12 Pursuing a relationship with a former patient is more likely to be (or be seen to be) an abuse of your position if you are a psychiatrist or a paediatrician. 13 Whatever your specialty, you must not pursue a personal relationship with a former patient who is still vulnerable. If the former patient was vulnerable at the time that you treated them, but is no longer vulnerable, you should be satisfied that: - the patient’s decisions and actions are not influenced by the previous relationship between you - you are not (and could not be seen to be) abusing your professional position. 14 You must consider the potential risks involved in using social media and the impact that inappropriate use could have on your patients’ trust in you and society’s trust in the medical profession. Social media can blur the boundaries between a doctor’s personal and professional lives and may change the nature of the relationship between a doctor and a patient. You must follow our guidance on the use of social media.” Whilst this failing in itself is not so serious as to require any restriction on Dr Vedi’s registration, it is necessary in response to his misconduct to issue this formal warning.

This warning will be published on the medical register in line with our publication and disclosure policy, which can be found at www.gmc-uk.org/disclosurepolicy.'