Wolverhampton fertility clinic wins appeal over licence
A fertility clinic that was refused a licence after staff allegedly got permission to donate a woman's eggs while she was still sedated has won an appeal.
St Jude's Fertility Clinic in Penn, Wolverhampton, declared it was 'business as usual' after the decision of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) was overturned.
The clinic is owned and run by Dr Jude Harris Adeghe, who previously ran an IVF unit in New Cross Hospital.
Dr Adeghe said: "We are pleased to say that it is business as usual for St Jude's.
"We continue to offer a full range of assisted conception services to both new and old patients. We are continuing with our mission and vision statement to deliver effective fertility treatment with care and compassion.
"We are grateful for the support of all our patients, friends and family."
The clinic's licence renewal application was refused followed a complaint to the General Medical Council from a patient, named only as 'Ms A', dating back to 2010, who was referred to the clinic by the NHS for egg collection.
Clinical records show she was sedated for the procedure at 9.15am and then signed a consent form to donate some of her eggs.
The GMC, which forwarded the complaint to the HFEA, carried out its own investigation and decided not to refer the matter to its fitness to practice panel.
In the appeals committee decision, it says the licence committee described the taking of consent after sedation as 'wholly wrong', as the sedative used has a hypnotic effect and can affect the memory.
The case was heard by the appeals committee in July and September.
In its decision, the committee says it found Dr Adeghe is a suitable 'person responsible'.
They found he had provided training to staff, and while he took various steps when he became aware of the improper consent being taken, the panel did not consider them to be 'sufficiently rigorous'.
The staff meeting should have been formally minuted, and rather than admonishing the nurse responsible she should have been given a formal warning and received further training, and Ms A should have been contacted, informed of the concerns, and asked whether she was prepared to confirm the consent she signed.
An independent audit of patient records concluded that the case of Ms A was a 'single, isolated event', and the committee says they accept that Dr Adeghe is committed to addressing the serious issues which arose in the case of Ms A, and that there is no ongoing risk to patients.
The committee 'unanimously concluded' it would be disproportionate and inconsistent with previous decisions to refuse to renew the licence, but Dr Adeghe's conduct during the incident warranted the renewal only be for two years and subject to special conditions. Most are granted for four years.
