S'pore doctor given 50% 'discount' on 14-month suspension after being found guilty 13 years after patient filed complaint

A senior doctor was given a reduced sentence of seven months, half of what a disciplinary tribunal had intended, after he was found guilty of professional misconduct 13 years after the initial complaint was filed.

According to the grounds of decision published by the Singapore Medical Council (SMC), Teo Sek Khee, a geriatrician, was suspended as of Apr. 27.

The SMC disciplinary tribunal said: "After very careful consideration, we apply a discount of 50 per cent to account for this delay, reducing the sentence from 14 months to 7 months."

"This discount reflects the exceptional nature of the delays while still ensuring that the sentence serves the purposes of specific deterrence and maintenance of public confidence in the medical profession."

Patient was under Teo's care from 1998 to 2013

According to the tribunal documents, Teo had been a medical practitioner since 1985 and became a registered specialist in geriatric medicine in 1998.

Teo was said to have failed to provide "competent and appropriate care" to his patient.

The patient, who was 72 years of age as of August 2013, had been under Teo's care since July 1998.

The case centres around Teo's failure to detect and identify the patient's gastrointestinal bleeding and manage his condition appropriately when the patient was admitted between Aug. 24 and Sep. 2, 2013.

Gastrointestinal bleeding

On Aug. 22, 2013, the patient visited Teo for water retention in his ankles, which Teo treated before sending the patient home.

However, on Aug. 24, 2013, the patient returned and was admitted to a hospital.

The tribunal's documents said that, based on the patient's medical history, multiple risk factors could lead to gastrointestinal bleeding.

The patient did not control his diabetes well, had hypertension, chronic anaemia and was on warfarin, a blood thinner, for around six years.

Despite knowing of the risks, Teo was accused of not conducting the specific medical procedures to investigate potential gastrointestinal bleeding before discharging the patient on Sep. 2, 2013.

Patient admitted to different hospital

On Sep. 5, 2013, the patient was admitted to a different hospital, where he was diagnosed with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. 

According to the tribunal's documents, he had to receive multiple blood transfusions to treat his severe anaemia.

Despite this, the patient had to experience recurrent episodes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding over the subsequent months.

The episodes were sufficiently severe and recurrent that the patient required the surgical removal of his spleen on Jul. 26, 2014.

Delay of 12 years

The patient's complaint was received by the SMC on Nov. 5, 2013 and on Apr. 4, 2014, SMC issued the notice of complaint to Teo.

Teo provided a written explanation on Apr. 10, 2014, and on Jun. 23, 2015, the SMC's complaints committee issued a letter of advice.

On Jul. 15, 2015, the patient appealed to the Minister for Health, and the ministry directed the complaints committee to provide detailed reasons for the decision.

The grounds of decision were provided to the patient, and the patient confirmed his intention to continue the appeal on Oct. 8, 2018.

After a three-year gap, the ministry directed the SMC to appoint a disciplinary tribunal on Oct. 13, 2021.

Plead guilty

SMC issued the notice of inquiry on Nov. 7, 2024 and the evidence was heard over six days from Oct. 21 to 29, 2025.

The tribunal adopted a starting point of a 14-month suspension, considering Teo's seniority, the seriousness of his clinical failures and similar cases.

Teo eventually decided to plead guilty to the amended charge on Jan. 16, 2026, which the tribunal noted as "relatively late".

This was six days after the hearings concluded and before the delivery of the verdict.

"Teo made various attempts to elide from taking responsibility by putting up a range of implausible reasons in an ostensible bid to explain away the series of omissions that culminated with the patient’s collapse at home".

The tribunal also said that this was after the "plainly wrong decision" to discharge the patient, despite "concerning signs".

Limited discount

The tribunal cited Teo's 40-year career without any prior disciplinary action and "inordinate delay in prosecution" as mitigating factors.

For the latter, the tribunal accepted that Teo was "being unduly subject to prolonged stress" and the procedural history of the case shows a "series of delays that may have caused a degree of prejudice".

Taking into account personal circumstances, the tribunal said Teo endured a "significant psychological toll during what should have been the concluding years of his medical career".

Teo was brought before the SMC's disciplinary tribunal, censured and was directed to pay the costs and expenses of the proceedings, including the cost of SMC's lawyers.

Teo was also made to submit a written undertaking to SMC, stating that he would not "engage in the conduct complained of or any similar conduct in the future".

The tribunal said that the patient had "persisted so long in his complaint, as he was genuinely seeking answers on his treatment and what may have transpired in the sequence of events that eventuated in his collapse at home".

"As the hearing is concluded, this tribunal extends our encouragement for Dr Teo to reach out to connect with the Patient in a gesture of conciliation and closure."