HCPC determination — review hearing
Struck off the register
The regulator’s term: erasure
What does “struck off the register” mean?
Being struck off (the regulator calls this "erasure") removes the practitioner from the register. They are no longer permitted to practise this profession in the UK. Erasure can be reviewed after a minimum of five years, but is otherwise indefinite.
Concerning Lady Deborah Knight Griffiths, chiropodist podiatrist (HCPC CH31360).
Decision date: 16 January 2026 · Hearing started 16 January 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel decided that Lady Deborah Knight Griffiths should be subject to the published outcome from a review hearing. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The public page records the profession, registration number, allegation, finding, order, notes and hearing history for source verification.
Charges
The HCPTS allegation section states: ;• she failed to maintain accurate and complete records for Service User 1 as detailed in Particular 3;• she inappropriately sutured Service User 1’s wound and did not obtain a tissue sample or wound swab prior to the procedure;• she had acted beyond the scope of her practice in performing a partial amputation and in suturing Service User 1’s wound in circumstances where she had not maintained or developed the skills to do so. 11. The panel found that the proven facts amounted to misconduct on the basis that:• the Registrant had performed an invasive procedure outside the scope of her practice upon an individual who was acutely vulnerable and thereby placed him at real risk of harm; and• her conduct was in breach of several of the HCPC Standards of conduct, performance and ethics and the Standards of Proficiency for Chiropodists/Podiatrists. 12. The panel found that the Registrant’s fitness to practise was impaired by reason of her misconduct having regard to the following:• whilst the Registrant’s shortcomings were capable of being remedied, the Registrant had not in fact remedied them;• the Registrant’s reflection was superficial and did not demonstrate having been embedded in practice;• there was no evidence of Personal Development Plans, audits, peer supervision, or mentoring of her practice;• there was an absence of recognition by the Registrant about what had happened in the past and why, and the panel had little confidence that the misconduct would not be repeated in the future;• the panel acknowledged that the Registrant believed that she was acting in Service User 1’s best interests, but there was a risk that in the future the Registrant would act impulsively in a misguided attempt to aid a service user. 13. The panel therefore concluded that the Registrant’s...
Findings
The HCPTS page records a review hearing for Lady Deborah Knight Griffiths by the Conduct and Competence Committee. The panel directed removal from the HCPC Register. The allegation section states: ;• she failed to maintain accurate and complete records for Service User 1 as detailed in Particular 3;• she inappropriately sutured Service User 1’s wound and did not obtain a tissue sample or wound swab prior to the.... The order section states: ..
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published HCPC 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.