Olusola Sanusi
Introduction
Olusola Sanusi is a UK doctor who was suspended from the medical register for eight months on 26 November 2025, after a Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service found she wrote a private prescription for a patient while knowing her licence to practise had been withdrawn — and found the act dishonest. Sanusi attended the first four days of the hearing and was absent thereafter; the tribunal went on to find the disputed allegations proved, her insight limited, and her fitness to practise impaired by misconduct. No immediate order was sought or imposed .
Background Information
On 2 April 2024, Sanusi was notified that her licence to practise had been withdrawn following a failure to revalidate — the annual process that keeps a doctor’s licence current — and that she must not work in any role requiring a licence, stopping such work immediately. On 1 August 2024, four months into that prohibition, she wrote a private prescription for Patient A covering atorvastatin and fluticasone furoate, knowing her licence had been withdrawn and that a licence was required in order to prescribe. The GMC alleged the prescription was dishonest; she denied it .
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated (regulatory). The findings are a medical tribunal’s conclusions on the civil standard. No criminal charge was involved.
The tribunal found the disputed allegations proved, including the dishonesty limb: a doctor who has lost her licence for failing to revalidate remains on the register but may not prescribe, and the tribunal found Sanusi knew both facts when she signed the private prescription anyway. Its insight finding was that hers was limited — she had not accepted her actions were dishonest, and the tribunal found she had failed to be completely open and honest in her own oral evidence. The dishonesty was undertaken in the course of professional practice, which the tribunal listed as aggravating .
Mitigation was real but bounded: no previous fitness to practise history and previous good character; no repetition since August 2024; a single isolated occurrence with no evidence of profit or personal gain; personal and family stressors at the time; no harm caused and a low potential risk to the public. Against it: no apology, and the dishonesty never accepted. The sanction was an eight-month suspension with a review hearing directed. The GMC sought no immediate order, and none was imposed .
Public Reaction and Consequences
The consequence is the eight-month suspension, and with it the formal finding that a prescription written while unlicensed was not an oversight but an act the tribunal found she knew was wrong. The case is recorded in MedicWatch’s listing of doctors suspended in 2025 .
The determination identifies no harm to Patient A — the medicines prescribed are commonplace — and no profit motive. What it records instead is a doctor who continued to practise, in the one act the tribunal examined, after being told to stop. No public comment from Sanusi appears in the fetched record beyond the determination .
Current Status
Sanusi is a suspended doctor under an eight-month order imposed on 26 November 2025, with a review hearing directed before it ends, no immediate order in force during the appeal window. The tribunal’s impairment finding rests on the misconduct and dishonesty, with the persistence of her denial — four months after the notification, and still at the hearing itself — built into the insight assessment .
The review will test whether the dishonesty finding has been faced rather than appealed in substance. A licence withdrawn for failure to revalidate is itself recoverable; a dishonesty finding on top of it is the harder barrier .
Impact on Their Career/Life
The revalidation system is designed to be routine — paperwork, appraisal, renewal — and losing a licence through it is normally an administrative lapse, not a misconduct case. This became one on 1 August 2024, when the prohibition met a prescription pad. The tribunal’s mitigation list — good character, no gain, no harm, family stressors — explains the eight months rather than erasure; its aggravating list — no apology, no acceptance, dishonesty in practice — explains why a doctor with those mitigations was suspended at all .