Health and Care Professions Council determination — substantive hearing
HCPTS panel strikes off Gail Ashington over unsafe ultrasound scans
An HCPTS panel ordered radiographer Gail Ashington's erasure after finding repeated rushed and substandard ultrasound examinations amounted to misconduct.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 5 November 2025 · Updated 23 September 2026
Erasure (struck off the register)
Data last checked: 23 September 2026Report a correction
What does “struck off the register” mean?
The regulator directed removal from the register in this decision. The decision explains when the direction takes effect and any appeal provisions. Check the official register for the practitioner's current registration status.
Concerning Gail Ashington, radiographer (Health and Care Professions Council RA32420).
Decision date: 5 November 2025 · Hearing started 13 October 2025 and ended 5 November 2025
In plain English
The HCPTS panel found that radiographer Gail Ashington repeatedly rushed ultrasound examinations and produced scans below the required standard. It found all factual particulars proved, misconduct and current impairment, but not lack of competence. The panel ordered her erasure from the HCPC Register and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Charges
It was alleged that between August 2019 and March 2020 the Registrant performed excessive numbers of ultrasound examinations, rushed scans or spent insufficient time with patients, performed scans to an unacceptable standard, and ineffectively undertook umbilical artery trace Doppler scans. The alleged conduct was said to amount to lack of competence and/or misconduct and current impairment.
Findings
The Panel found Particulars 1 to 4 and all their sub-particulars proved. It found that the proved conduct did not amount to lack of competence but did amount to misconduct, and that the Registrant's fitness to practise was currently impaired on both personal and public grounds. It directed that her name be struck from the HCPC Register and imposed an 18-month interim suspension for the appeal period.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Mitigating factors
the Registrant made admissions relating to her conduct shortly before the regulatory hearing commenced; the Registrant has shown some reflection on her actions, albeit the Panel considered the reflections to be very limited in nature and mainly focused upon herself; and the Registrant is of previous good regulatory character.
Aggravating factors
the Registrant’s conduct was repeated and sustained; her actions caused harm to service users and had the potential to cause harm to other service users and/or colleagues; the Registrant has stated that she has no desire to “retrain”; and the Registrant has demonstrated a lack of meaningful insight, remorse and/or remediation.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions Council 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.