Surgeons are commonly evaluated with respect to outcomes and adherence to rules and regulations, rather than a true holistic examination of the character of the surgeon in question. We sought to examine the character failings of surgeons who faced fitness to practice enquiries under the Medical Practitioner Tribunal Service in the UK. In particular, we examined the absence of virtue as perceived through the lens of Aristotelian ethics using thematic analysis of tribunal hearing transcripts from 2016 to 2020. We identified three overarching themes that are explored in depth: ‘the god complex’, ‘reputation over integrity’ and ‘wounded pride’. We hope to use this as the foundation for a re-examination of the place of phronesis in postgraduate surgical education, which we argue should be perceived as an exercise in character development and reformation rather than the simplistic teaching of skills to standardised outcomes.
Data availability statement
Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors On behalf of myself and my coauthor, I can confirm that both authors have made a valid contribution to the work. Both were involved in the inception and original idea of the project, sourcing relevant material from MPTS, independent thematic analysis, discussion of the results and preparation/critical revision of the resultant manuscript. Both authors have approved the final version of the manuscript for submission and the most recent revision. Neither author has any conflicts of interest to declare.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.