Marc Lamah Operates Despite Ban

NHS Surgeon Works in Sussex Hospital Despite Private Practice Ban Over Safety Fears

A surgeon, prevented from working for a major private medical provider due to patient safety issues, continues his surgical duties within the National Health Service. An inquiry has shown that Marc Lamah, a consultant surgeon, had his authority to practice medicine revoked by Nuffield Health. Despite this, Mr Lamah keeps his position at the NHS trust for University Hospitals Sussex, a body already the focus of a major police probe into purported medical malpractice.

The case brings up significant concerns regarding safety protocols and communication between private healthcare and the NHS. While a key employer found Mr Lamah’s professional activities unsuitable for their facilities, an NHS trust serving a community of two million people allows him to maintain his surgical practice. Patients have recounted terrible experiences of life-changing injuries from procedures he led, intensifying the alarm. This situation is set against Operation Bramber, a police inquiry looking into hundreds of instances of purported injury at the Sussex trust.

A Tale of Two Employers

Nuffield Health, a leading private provider, took decisive action against Marc Lamah following an external inquiry. The company formally withdrew his ability to practice, barring him from all of its hospitals. In a clear statement, Nuffield Health announced that his professional behaviour was not aligned with the required criteria for medical practice and governance. The organisation underscored that the well-being of patients is its foremost concern and it requires every consultant to meet the most stringent benchmarks.

In direct contrast, the Sussex NHS trust defended its decision to continue employing the surgeon. A spokesperson for the trust explained it had reviewed the complete Nuffield investigation. According to the NHS body, the report indicated no issues related to technical skill, surgical methods, or the well-being of patients. This creates a troubling discrepancy, leaving patients to question how one medical professional can be considered a risk by one institution and perfectly safe by another.

The Nuffield Investigation

The decision by Nuffield Health was not made hastily. It came after senior staff flagged significant worries in 2023 about Mr Lamah’s performance. An internal review of his work at the company's Brighton hospital uncovered alarming data. An individual who previously worked at the hospital disclosed that during a one-year span, one-third of Mr Lamah's patients had encountered what is classified as a "moderate harm event."

These events are defined as incidents serious enough to necessitate a patient's readmission or move to a different facility for additional treatment. The expected frequency for such complications, according to the source, should be around 5%. The data suggested the complication rate for Mr Lamah was more than six times higher than this benchmark. This stark statistical anomaly prompted Nuffield to launch the deeper, independent investigation that ultimately led to the withdrawal of his practising privileges.

A Patient's "Five Years of Hell"

Sheryl Hunter has endured an experience she calls 'five years of hell' after an NHS procedure that Mr Lamah performed. In 2019, she underwent a procedure to treat endometriosis, which involved taking out a piece of her large bowel. Mr Lamah chose the best therapeutic option was to attach the remaining colon to the small bowel. Days after leaving the hospital, Ms Hunter states she "sensed something pop" as a terrible fluid began leaking from her body.

She was taken urgently back to Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital. Doctors there discovered the connection created by surgery between her intestines had ruptured. For ten days, intestinal contents had been leaking into her abdomen, a life-threatening situation. Although this immediate crisis was resolved, it marked the beginning of years of agony and repeated hospital visits for Hunter.

A Plea for Help

Following the initial complication, for years, Sheryl Hunter went on suffering from severe and weakening pain. She made multiple appointments with her family doctor and trips to the Royal Sussex hospital, desperately seeking a solution. She describes her life as having very few good days, often spent in a curled-up position and crying from the pain that shot through her stomach, spine, and limbs. The simple act of using the toilet became an ordeal, causing her to scream in tears and requiring her to empty her bowels by hand.

Correspondence provided by her GP shows multiple letters were sent to Marc Lamah requesting a review of Ms Hunter's case. In a letter from early 2023, the GP explicitly stated, 'we have sent you letters on several occasions'. Mr Lamah responded shortly after, asserting he had not seen any prior correspondence. Yet, by the end of 2023, her GP was still sending urgent letters, and colleagues reportedly pleaded with him for a consultation, which he denied.

Image Credit - BBC

The Shocking Discovery

After years of being left in agony, Sheryl Hunter finally discovered the cause of her suffering in the spring of 2024. A consultation was provided by a different specialist at another facility within the same trust—Haywards Heath's Princess Royal Hospital—who consented to see her. The findings were horrifying. Her discharge sheet, which she provided to reporters, revealed the core problem. The notes detailed a 180-degree turn of the small bowel, which resulted in a type of internal hernia and a twisted surgical connection.

The connection made during surgery was created in the original 2019 procedure. Ms Hunter said the new consultant told her that when reconnecting her intestines, they had been attached backwards. This error created a continuous danger of rupturing, a catastrophic event that would have been fatal within a couple of hours. Medical staff told her that had she not been emptying her bowels by hand for the last half-decade, a fatal rupture would have likely already happened.

Another Case Emerges

The disturbing allegations against Mr Lamah are not limited to a single case. Another patient, an 80-year-old woman, endured a traumatic experience in the spring of 2024. She was having an operation for a pelvic prolapse when Mr Lamah mistakenly cut her bowel. The error led to severe internal bleeding and life-threatening sepsis, requiring a second emergency operation to save her. She now lives with the permanent consequences of the mistake, including the need for a stoma bag.

This case also raised issues of transparency. The patient alleges that before the procedure, Mr Lamah moved the operation to a different location, citing a missing scanner. However, it was later revealed that the necessary equipment was not available at either site. Furthermore, Nuffield Health had reportedly already suspended these specific types of operations in Brighton due to wider safety concerns, a fact the patient says was never disclosed to her before her surgery.

Allegations of Unprofessional Conduct

Beyond the specific surgical outcomes, former colleagues have raised serious concerns about Marc Lamah’s professional behaviour. According to reports provided to journalists, some colleagues alleged he would impose unnecessary time limits on highly complex surgical procedures. One source claimed Mr Lamah would "set himself a challenge" to complete an emergency operation within a very short timeframe, such as 45 minutes, raising questions about his priorities in the operating theatre.

This approach appears to conflict with the principles of patient-centred care, which prioritises safety and thoroughness over speed. These allegations, combined with the claims of failing to disclose risks and refusing to see a patient in severe pain, paint a troubling picture. They suggest a pattern of behaviour that legal experts argue raises significant issues around transparency and accountability in both private and NHS healthcare settings.

A Trust Under Scrutiny

The controversy surrounding a single surgeon is unfolding within a much larger crisis at the Sussex-based NHS trust. UHSussex is among the biggest organisations in the NHS. It manages seven hospitals serving East and West Sussex, a community of nearly two million. The trust was once considered among the best in England, but it is now facing a confluence of serious problems that have damaged its reputation and shaken public confidence.

The organisation is currently the subject of a massive police investigation looking into hundreds of instances of purported medical injury and potential cover-ups. This context is crucial for understanding the current situation. The questions about the continued employment of Mr Lamah are not happening in a vacuum. They are being asked of a trust whose broader clinical governance and oversight are already under intense external scrutiny from law enforcement.

The Shadow of Operation Bramber

The police probe called Operation Bramber was launched after two whistleblowers raised the alarm about patient safety. Sussex Police are examining claims of preventable deaths and injuries that occurred from 2015 to 2021. The inquiry initially focused on 105 cases within the trust's general surgery and neurosurgery departments but has since expanded significantly.

Following a media investigation, more patients came forward with their own stories of alleged poor treatment. The number of cases under review by the police has now grown to more than 200. A dedicated team of officers is working with independent medical experts to meticulously review each case. This process will determine which incidents will be taken forward as part of the criminal investigation. The scale of Operation Bramber indicates a potentially systemic problem at the trust.

Manslaughter Investigation

The gravity of the situation at UHSussex is underscored by the nature of the police probe. Operation Bramber is not simply looking at instances of poor care. Sussex Police are actively investigating claims of gross negligence manslaughter and corporate manslaughter. This means detectives are exploring whether the actions of individuals or the systemic failings of the trust itself led directly to patient deaths in a manner that could be considered criminal.

Such investigations are rare and complex, reserved for the most serious instances of purported medical failure. The fact that this line of inquiry is being pursued highlights the severity of the concerns raised by whistleblowers and families. It places the trust's leadership and clinical practices under a legal microscope, with the potential for charges that could have profound consequences for both individuals and the institution as a whole.

A System in Crisis

Beyond the police inquiry, the Sussex-based NHS trust is struggling with significant operational pressures. The trust currently holds the unenviable record for the largest number of patients waiting over 18 months for treatment in all of England. This statistic points to a system under immense strain, unable to meet fundamental healthcare targets for its large patient population.

The trust’s chief executive, George Findlay, has publicly and "sincerely apologised" to patients who have waited longer than they should have for care. He acknowledged that the team for neurosurgery, in particular, has faced significant challenges. However, he also recognised that "we have much further to go in improving care and better supporting colleagues." For many patients and their families, these words may offer little comfort amid growing concerns over both safety and access to timely treatment.

Image Credit - BBC

The Trust's Official Defence

In response to the revelations about Marc Lamah, the trust's top medical official, Professor Katie Urch, issued a detailed statement. She insisted that patient safety and quality of care are the highest priorities, and that all surgeons are subject to "rigorous and continuous oversight". Professor Urch confirmed that the trust had reviewed the NHS data for Mr Lamah, which she said indicated his results were inside nationally expected parameters.

Crucially, she repeated the claim that Nuffield Health's own investigation found no issues with Mr Lamah's technical skill or surgical practice. Commenting on Sheryl Hunter's case, Professor Urch stated that the trust could not comment on a specific patient's case publicly but understood the distress of living with complicated, ongoing medical problems. She added that while no procedure is able to promise success, the trust has "robust systems... to facilitate our learning and improvement" when things go wrong.

Contradictory Evidence

The official defence from UHSussex stands in stark contrast to the evidence provided by Nuffield Health and patient testimonies. The central contradiction remains unresolved. Nuffield Health stated Mr Lamah's behaviour failed to meet the criteria, a clear indictment of his professional practice. Yet, UHSussex claims the same report found no reason for concern. This discrepancy raises a critical question: are both organisations reading the same report?

Furthermore, the trust's assertion that the outcomes for Mr Lamah are within the normal range is challenged by the harrowing accounts from patients like Sheryl Hunter and the 80-year-old woman who now has a stoma. While the trust states an error in surgery was merely one possibility presented for Ms Hunter's condition, the severity of her injury and its direct link to the 2019 procedure creates a powerful counter-narrative to the trust's statistics-based defence.

An Independent Expert's View

To gain further clarity on Sheryl Hunter's case, the BBC consulted an outside medical specialist. After reviewing the details of her condition, the expert provided a clear and unambiguous opinion. They concluded that the 180-degree twist in her small bowel was "definitely a result of the procedure in 2019" performed by Marc Lamah.

The trust, however, has maintained that only an additional surgery could definitively confirm whether Mr Lamah committed a mistake or if the twist occurred naturally over time. For Ms. Hunter, this position offers little solace. The damage she has endured is now far worse than it could have been if the problem had been identified and treated sooner, leaving her facing a future of complex and high-risk reconstructive surgery.

The Human Cost

For the patients affected, the consequences of these alleged failures are devastating and lifelong. Sheryl Hunter is now on the list for a significant pelvic reconstruction operation, a necessary precursor before surgeons can even attempt to repair her twisted intestines. The years of pain, dismissal, and physical trauma have taken an immense toll. She has now spoken with Sussex Police regarding her ordeal, contributing her story to the growing list of cases under review in Operation Bramber.

Her final verdict on the surgeon is damning. She recalled being told that Mr Lamah was described as having a poor bedside manner but being a brilliant surgeon. After her experience, she offers a different assessment. She stated that he has a "poor bedside manner and is a poor surgeon." In her view, he should not be permitted to perform surgery.

Calls for Accountability

The legal community is watching the events in Sussex closely. Penny Fitzpatrick, a clinical negligence lawyer at Thompsons Solicitors, which is representing victims of another notorious surgeon, commented on the case. She stated that the allegations involving Mr Lamah "highlight deeply troubling issues around transparency, patient safety, and accountability."

Ms Fitzpatrick emphasised that whether they are in private care or the NHS, all patients have a fundamental right to expect treatment that meets the highest possible standards. She affirmed her firm's commitment to supporting victims of medical negligence, ensuring they receive justice, and holding those responsible for their suffering to account. The case, she argues, underscores an urgent need for systemic improvements in how healthcare oversight is managed across the country.

A Culture of Fear?

The allegations surrounding Marc Lamah may be indicative of a much wider cultural problem within the Sussex-based NHS trust. Reports emerging from the Operation Bramber investigation suggest a "culture of fear" may have existed within the trust. This allegedly deterred staff from speaking out about safety concerns, a critical failure in any healthcare environment.

The wider police investigation is examining not just surgical errors but also systemic failings. These include reports of dangerously delayed care and, most disturbingly, of untrained surgeons being permitted to perform complex procedures. If proven, these claims would point to a catastrophic breakdown in clinical governance and management oversight, creating an environment where patient safety was repeatedly compromised. The trust, therefore, faces questions that go far beyond the actions of any single employee.

Other Figures Implicated

The scope of Operation Bramber extends beyond a single surgeon or department, indicating the potentially widespread nature of the problems at UHSussex. While Marc Lamah is a key figure in the general surgery investigation, the police inquiry also mentions at least one other consultant. Mr Carl Hardwidge, a consultant neurosurgeon, is another name connected to the investigation into the neurosurgery unit of the trust.

According to online information, Mr Hardwidge left the employment of the NHS trust in 2023. However, he is reportedly still practising medicine privately. The inclusion of multiple specialities and surgeons in the police inquiry suggests that the issues of patient harm and alleged negligence may not have been isolated incidents. Rather, they could be symptoms of a more pervasive failure of standards and safety across different parts of the trust.

Conclusion: A System Under Strain

The case of Marc Lamah leaves a host of vital questions unanswered. It exposes a dangerous gap in healthcare oversight, where a surgeon deemed unsafe by one major provider can continue working for the NHS without apparent penalty. The conflicting statements from Nuffield Health and UHSussex reveal a breakdown in communication and a failure to establish a common standard for patient safety.

This situation is made more alarming by its context. UHSussex is a trust already under the shadow of a criminal investigation into potential corporate manslaughter. It is an organisation struggling with record-breaking waiting lists and facing allegations of a deep-seated "culture of fear". For patients like Sheryl Hunter, the fight for answers and justice continues. Meanwhile, the public is left to wonder how many more incidents may have occurred and whether the system has the capacity to truly learn from its mistakes.