“Why the General Medical Council should discipline doctors who misuse social media”

This opinion by Daniel Sokol, medical ethicist and barrister, was published in the BMJ on the 14 February 2025. This article refers specifically to Physician Associates [PAs] stating that “the topic of PAs has become particularly toxic on social media”.


Those who, like me, have experienced harm as a result of psychiatric interventions, particularly prescribed drugs, also encounter the issues facing PAs, as described above by Daniel Sokol.

I was an NHS psychiatrist for quarter of a century until I retired 5 years ago. Concerned about the issue of Doctors’ use of social media, and like Daniel Sokol not wishing to involve the GMC, I raised this with the College of which I was a member: the Royal College of Psychiatrists. My experience was that this only served to make me a target for further social media abuse by some doctors and their followers. Last year, my wife sent this letter to the Royal College of Psychiatrists. I am sharing it here in case others have had, or are facing, similar discrimination, harassment and false portrayals on social media by doctors so that they are aware of the College response in my situation.

From: Dr Sian F Gordon
To: Dr Lade Smith, President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

14 October 2024

Dear Dr Smith,

I am writing to you as a last resort in the hope that, as President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, you are in a position to effect some meaningful change.

I have recently retired as a GP but continue to work as an appraiser and as such have observed the launch of the latest version of Good Medical Practice with professional interest. As I’m sure you know, the themes of the updated version are as follows: creating respectful, fair and compassionate workplaces; promoting patient centred care; helping to tackle discrimination; championing fair and inclusive leadership; supporting continuity of care and safe delegation.

Most of these principles are relevant when it comes to the situation of my husband, Dr Peter Gordon, who is a retired psychiatrist and former member of the College. Peter has long had an interest in over-medicalisation in healthcare and this led him to realise that conflicts of interest might be a contributory factor. He petitioned the Scottish Parliament for the introduction of Sunshine legislation. This led to a public consultation in which the majority of those consulted agreed that such legislation should be implemented. He was disappointed that the Scottish Government decided not to proceed, and also that College offered no support for Sunshine legislation. Indeed, a number of eminent psychiatrists appeared to express a negative view.

Peter also has a story of his own regarding psychiatric intervention. In the late 1990s he was prescribed by his GP an SSRI for anxiety symptoms and insomnia. I have witnessed the great difficulties he has encountered in trying to stop this medication, causing symptoms different from and far worse than his initial presentation.

My husband is also what he would call a “lad o’ pairts” – for the non-Scots this means a man with a broad range of interests. He has a Masters in Landscape Architecture from the University of Edinburgh and his film-making has been recognised by leading figures in the Scottish arts community.

You will be aware of the now widely held concerns about the potential for negative impact on the mental health of the population of social media use. When social media use amongst professionals first became widespread, Peter was keen to embrace the ease of communication and feeling of community it offered. However, he soon became aware of some of the downsides that are now widely recognised and has not had a social media presence himself for a number of years. He is however aware that his continued interest in conflicts of interest in medicine, which forms a fraction of the material on his website, has made him a target for abusive behaviour on social media by a number of professionals, most of whom he has never met. Any efforts he has made to address this behaviour, which typically contains untruths about his motivation in an attempt to undermine him, appear only to encourage further abuse. Peter is an able, well-educated medical professional: if he has faced this kind of behaviour I hate to think of how patients who have any questions to raise about their care might feel. The response of the College, as outlined in your own recent letter to Peter, is that it has no remit to address abusive behaviour of its members online.

I find it astounding that the College appears to tolerate this behaviour. The online depiction of my husband by some members of the College has been nothing short of appallingly nasty and downright untrue, such that I recognise nothing of it in my husband of over 30 years. Peter is a kind and caring man, to whom ethics are important and who has long continued to advocate for this as vital to the safe practice of medicine. This has been at the same time as maintaining interests in philosophy, architecture, horticulture and social history.

In stating that the College has no remit to act on this, it could be seen to be tolerating abusive behaviour on social media by its members. This is contrary to most of the themes of Good Medical Practice and risks eroding the trust of the public in the profession. I realise that wider society also struggles with how to ensure respectful interactions on social media, but, given the unique position of psychiatry in its powers to diagnose, detain and treat, surely it should be trying harder to set the best possible standards for online behaviour?

Thank you for taking the time to read my letter; I hope you will also take some time to reflect on its contents.

Dr Sian F. Gordon


In a reply, dated  25 November 2024, Dr Lade Smith, President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists,  stated: “The College is not a regulator, and it is outside of our remit to monitor or regulate the social media activity of individual College members”.


Prof Howard on “fellow mental health professionals” who have expressed concern about  his unprofessional behaviour and abusive language on social media:

1st May 2025:

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.