Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Suspended from practice — 1 year
The regulator’s term: suspension
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Charity Gentry, doctor (General Medical Council 4566825).
Decision date: 19 December 2025 · Hearing started 29 October 2024 and ended 19 December 2025
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Charity Gentry's fitness to practise was impaired by reason of misconduct. The tribunal found she had given dishonest evidence at a Coroner's Inquest regarding the care of a patient whose baby died, and had also committed clinical failings in the care of multiple obstetric patients between 2017 and 2018. The tribunal imposed a 12-month suspension with a review directed, finding erasure disproportionate given her otherwise unblemished career and developing insight.
Charges
Dr Gentry, a consultant obstetrician, faced allegations of clinical failings in the care of multiple patients between January and December 2017, including errors in managing induction of labour and instrumental delivery, and failure to offer caesarean section when clinically indicated. She was also alleged to have given dishonest evidence at a Coroner's Inquest on 18 February 2020 concerning the death of Baby E following the care of Patient D in September 2017.
Findings
The Tribunal found a number of the clinical failings and the dishonesty allegations proved. It found that Dr Gentry gave dishonest evidence at the Coroner's Inquest, motivated by a desire to justify or conceal her actions, and that this amounted to serious misconduct. It found her fitness to practise impaired. The Tribunal imposed a 12-month suspension with a review directed, finding erasure disproportionate given her otherwise unblemished career, engagement with proceedings and developing insight. An immediate order was imposed; she has lodged an appeal.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
Dr Gentry had an otherwise unblemished career of over 20 years in a highly demanding specialty. There had been no repetition of similar concerns. She had worked under conditions at Portsmouth NHS Trust and impressed colleagues. She had undertaken some remediation including relevant courses. There were significant work-related pressures and personal stressors at the relevant time. A substantial number of positive testimonials were provided by colleagues.
Aggravating factors
Dr Gentry was a senior and experienced consultant in a position of trust. The dishonesty occurred under oath at a Coroner's Court where the highest standards of honesty are required. The dishonesty went to central issues concerning the care of Patient D and had the potential to blame another and obscure understanding of what occurred. Her insight into the dishonesty was limited and largely inward-facing. She had caused emotional harm to Patient D.
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.