Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — review hearing
Practising with restrictions — 1 year
The regulator’s term: conditions on practice
What does “practising with restrictions” mean?
Conditions of practice allow the practitioner to keep working but only subject to specific restrictions — for example, supervision, limits on certain procedures, or required reporting to the regulator.
Concerning Andrew Foster, doctor (General Medical Council 6145357).
Decision date: 17 March 2026 · Hearing started 16 March 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Andrew Foster's fitness to practise remains impaired, but agreed his registration should change from suspension to conditions for 12 months. The earlier 9-month suspension was for inappropriate prescribing of controlled drugs, including prescribing to himself and issuing prescriptions in others' names for his own use. The conditions include restrictions on prescribing, supervision, and a ban on self-prescribing or working as a locum.
Charges
Review on the papers of a 9-month suspension imposed by the June 2025 Tribunal. The case arose from concerns about the inappropriate prescribing of controlled drugs over a sustained period. The Tribunal had found that Dr Foster used his position as a GP to access controlled drugs for his own use, including by prescribing to himself and by issuing prescriptions in the names of others (Patients C, D, E and F) when the medication was in fact intended for himself. There were wider concerns about unsafe prescribing practices, including prescribing without adequate assessment, clinical indication, treatment planning, or proper record-keeping. He also accepted a police caution for unlawful possession.
Findings
The Legally Qualified Chair, conducting the review on the papers with the agreement of both parties, found that Dr Foster had engaged fully with the GMC process, undertaken targeted CPD and remediation including courses on professional boundaries, prescribing standards and self-prescribing, worked in a non-clinical administrative role at his practice, and provided detailed reflections on his conduct. The Chair was satisfied that the suspension had achieved its public protection purpose and that remaining risks could be managed through a suite of conditions.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.