Information regarding review of services provided by fraudulent medical psychiatrist: FOI release

Information requested

Under the Freedom of Information Act, I wish to request information about a review which was commissioned by the then Directorate of Chief Medical Officer into the medical services provided by the fake NHS psychiatrist Zholia Alemi. Specifically, I wish to know:

• What health organisations took part in providing information for the review?
• Was there any harm caused to patients?
• Can you provide examples of the harm caused (say three examples)?
• Is there a summary report which covers the findings?
• How journalists can have access to this document and its findings summary (which I hope you can provide)?
• What actions and consequences this review led to?

Response

First and foremost, it may be helpful to clarify that the “review” referred to in the letter from Catherine Calderwood, then Chief Medical Officer, was actually to be undertaken by the individual Health Boards where Zholia Alemi (ZA) was known to have worked. The letter sought to establish a consistent process to be followed in reviewing her patients to identify any potential harm.

I enclose a copy of some of the information you requested in response to the questions below.

What health organisations took part in providing information for the review?
The letter was addressed to the Chief Executives of NHS Borders, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, NHS Ayrshire and Arran, NHS Grampian, NHS Tayside and NHS Highland, where it had earlier been confirmed that ZA worked.

It also announced the establishment of an Expert Clinical Advice Group (ECAG) to develop a consistent approach to support with the review and in contacting affected patients. While the reviews were the responsibility of individual Health Boards, our searches have confirmed periodic engagement with the ECAG.

Was there any harm caused to patients?
The role of the ECAG was to advise on methodology in identifying harm caused to patients, it did not participate in reviewing patient records. Further, its Scottish Government representative is no longer in post and our searches have not returned a definitive or reliable record of harm being caused to patients.

However the request of Health Boards to undertake a review of records to identify potential harm relating to patients within their responsibility was clear. You may therefore wish to consider seeking the information you require from those bodies.

Can you provide examples of the harm caused (say three examples)?
As above, you may wish to contact individual Health Boards for this information.

Is there a summary report which covers the findings?

How journalists can have access to this document and its findings summary (which I hope you can provide)?
Although it was envisioned that an internal report of these findings would be produced, several factors - such as the Covid-19 pandemic, subsequent NHS recovery and turnover of key personnel – ultimately prevented this.

As such, I hereby provide you with formal notice under section 17(1) of FOISA that the Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested.

What actions and consequences this review led to?
Health Boards were entitled to regard valid General Medical Council registration as sufficient evidence of right to practise medicine. However, we would expect any relevant learning from these reviews to be incorporated in internal processes.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.