Dr Aamer Khan on This Morning TV programme in June last year. Picture: Ken McKay/Rex Features
A celebrity cosmetic surgeon from Marylebone has been found guilty of misconduct after he “pressured” a woman into having invasive surgery by offering her a financial incentive.
Dr Aamer Khan, 49, who runs the Harley Street Skin Clinic, is one of Britain’s highest profile surgeons, with regular appearances on ITV’s This Morning and a weekly cosmetic column in the Daily Express.
His clinic’s website contains a number of testimonials from well-known names including actresses Stephanie Beacham, Patsy Kensit and Denise Welch.
A General Medical Council (GMC) panel heard that the woman, named only as Patient RR, felt under pressure after Dr Khan offered three patients a cash discount if they all booked a BodyTite procedure – a fat removal treatment similar to liposuction – at the same time.
The three unnamed work colleagues were given a 15 per cent discount from £6,000 to £5,100 if they paid within a week of their consultation on March 3, 2010, the panel heard.
GMC chairman Kenneth Hobbs said: “The panel found that such an agreement, involving Patient RR having discounted surgery at the same time as that of her colleagues, would cause increased pressure on Patient RR to go ahead with her elected procedure.”
GMC good medical practice guidelines state that doctors must not put pressure on patients to accept private treatment.
The panel, which met earlier this month, also upheld five further allegations that Dr Khan, who lives in Montagu Mews West, Marylebone, “failed to provide good clinical care” to Patient RR.
The panel found that he did not fully record the woman’s information prior to the operation. he did not have an individual present to monitor her safety during the procedure and failed to provide adequate post-operative care.
During her surgery on March 21, 2010, Dr Khan was the only “suitably trained person monitoring her safety” and the person responsible for producing a written record during surgery had, in fact, a background in finance, the panel found.
Ruling that Dr Khan’s fitness to practise was impaired by his misconduct, Mr Hobbs said that the surgeon had “not fully ensured Patient RR’s safety”.
He said: “Your part in the inducement of Patient RR and her two colleagues to undergo elective aesthetic surgery, your lack of clinical care before, during and after Patient RR’s procedure, and your lack of consideration for the safety of Patient RR were serious and all amount to misconduct.”
The surgeon will now be subject to a number of conditions imposed by the GMC over the next year.
When approached by the Wood&Vale, Mr Khan declined to comment on the matter.