Dr Josevania Martins Suspended for Deceitful Weight-Loss Prescriptions: North London 2026

Key Points

• Misconduct Sanction: Dr Josevania Martins, a North London gynaecologist and fertility specialist, has had her medical suspension extended by six months following a review by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS), keeping her barred from practice until 2027.
• Deceitful Prescriptions: Dr Martins issued prescriptions for semaglutide drugs—specifically Ozempic and Wegovy—to her then-boyfriend, identified as “Mr B,” while deliberately concealing her identity as a doctor.
• Fabricated Clinic and Aliases: To maintain her cover, Dr Martins created a fictitious clinic name on prescription forms, used fake names on dating applications, and provided a false residential address, claiming she lived in a shared house in East London.
• Misleading Explanations: Dr Martins falsely informed Mr B that the weight-loss medication had been prescribed by a medical colleague at an external facility, though she had written and signed the prescriptions herself.
• GMC Investigation Trigger: Mr B reported Dr Martins to the General Medical Council (GMC) two weeks after their short-lived relationship ended, after discovering discrepancies regarding her professional status and personal claims.
• Defense Rejected: Dr Martins defended her actions before the tribunal by claiming Mr B’s weight was a “medical emergency,” asserting that she acted out of compassion and used false details as a protective measure for her personal privacy.
• Breach of Professional Guidance: GMC guidelines strictly forbid doctors from prescribing medication to individuals with whom they have a close personal relationship, except in unavoidable, critical emergencies.

Hampstead (North London News) August 13, 2026 – A Hampstead gynaecologist and fertility specialist who dishonestly prescribed appetite-suppressing weight-loss injections to her boyfriend while concealing her status as a medical doctor has seen her suspension from practice extended by six months, ensuring she cannot return to medicine until 2027 at the earliest. Dr Josevania Martins was initially handed a nine-month suspension by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) following a full misconduct hearing, after an investigation concluded that her deliberate dishonesty and breach of professional boundaries severely undermined public trust in the medical profession.

Why Was Dr Josevania Martins Investigated By The General Medical Council?

The regulatory proceedings against Dr Josevania Martins arose from a series of events occurring between December 2023 and March 2024, during which she engaged in a brief two-month romantic relationship with a man publicly identified only as “Mr B.” Throughout their courtship, Dr Martins actively hid her occupation as a qualified medical practitioner.

As reported by Clare Dyer of The BMJ, Dr Martins decided to keep her medical background secret from Mr B until their relationship became more established.

To preserve this secrecy, she used an alias on online dating applications and withheld her real residential address in North London, informing Mr B that she resided in a shared house with two other women in East London.

As reported by Tom Foot of Camden New Journal, Mr B revealed in his witness statement that Dr Martins maintained strict boundaries regarding her living arrangements during their relationship.

Mr B explained that while the couple spent considerable time together at his home on weekends, Dr Martins refused to permit him to visit her residence, reinforcing her narrative that she lived with flatmates.

The relationship took a critical turn when Mr B sought assistance regarding weight management. Rather than directing him to formal healthcare channels, Dr Martins arranged to supply him with semaglutide medications—marketed under the brand names Ozempic and Wegovy.

However, instead of disclosing that she was issuing the prescriptions in her capacity as a registered physician, Dr Martins misled Mr B regarding the origins of the documents.

As reported by Josef Steen of The Evening Standard, Dr Martins fabricated the name of a non-existent medical clinic on the official prescription forms and claimed to have practising privileges there.

She informed Mr B that the paperwork had been completed and authorized by an independent physician colleague. In reality, Dr Martins had written and signed the prescriptions herself.

As reported by Erin Dean of Doctors.net.uk, Mr B stated in his evidence that although the prescription bore the signature of “Dr Martins,” he did not connect the name to his partner because she had never disclosed her profession or surname, leading him to believe the form had been completed by an unfamiliar doctor arranged through her acquaintances.

What Transpired During The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service Hearing?

The matter came to light approximately two weeks after the couple ended their relationship in March 2024, when Mr B submitted a detailed complaint to the General Medical Council. Beyond the initial concerns surrounding the weight-loss medication, Mr B raised broader allegations regarding transparency and professional ethics.

As reported by Tom Foot of Camden New Journal, Mr B informed the GMC that during their relationship, Dr Martins had disclosed confidential medical information regarding one of her private patients, who was married to a high-profile professional footballer.

This alleged breach of patient confidentiality added to the regulatory scrutiny surrounding her professional conduct.

During the initial MPTS tribunal hearing held in Manchester, Dr Martins represented herself and offered an extensive defense for her actions.

She argued that her intervention was prompted by what she perceived as a “medical emergency” regarding Mr B’s weight, claiming his NHS General Practitioner had failed to take appropriate action. She maintained that her decision to supply the medication stemmed purely from compassion and a desire to help her partner.

Regarding the falsified clinic details and personal aliases, Dr Martins argued that these steps were necessary protective measures designed to safeguard her personal privacy and maintain a clear boundary between her professional practice and her private social life.

She contended that the general public would sympathise with her desire for privacy and argued that no harm or safety risk had come to Mr B as a result of her actions.

However, the tribunal panel, chaired by Louise Sweet, firmly rejected Dr Martins’ assertions that the situation constituted a medical emergency or justified dishonesty.

The panel determined that by concealing her true role and inventing a fictitious clinic, Dr Martins deprived Mr B of the ability to provide informed consent for his medical treatment.

As reported by Clare Dyer of The BMJ, tribunal chair Louise Sweet highlighted the risks inherent in such deception, noting that if Mr B had suffered adverse side effects or medical complications from the semaglutide injections, his ignorance regarding the true identity and location of his treating physician would have restricted his ability to seek emergency medical recourse or formal medical accountability.

How Did The Regulator Rule On Dr Josevania Martins’ Conduct?

The General Medical Council provides explicit guidance to all licensed doctors practicing in the United Kingdom regarding prescribing boundaries.

Under GMC regulations, medical professionals are strictly prohibited from prescribing medication to themselves or to individuals with whom they share a close personal or romantic relationship, except in circumstances where emergency medical care is immediately required and no other doctor is available.

The tribunal panel concluded that Dr Martins made a deliberate choice to disregard her regulatory duties in order to maintain her personal deception while simultaneously dispensing medical treatment.

As reported by Tom Foot of Camden New Journal, the tribunal panel ruled:

“The tribunal took the view that Dr Martins’ dishonesty would inevitably have an adverse impact upon public confidence in her and the medical profession as a whole. Her actions fell far below the standards that are acceptable for a medical practitioner.”

The panel further noted that once Dr Martins provided Mr B with official medical prescriptions, an established doctor-patient relationship came into existence, bringing with it all associated legal, clinical, and ethical responsibilities.

While evaluating the appropriate sanction, the tribunal considered Dr Martins’ professional background. Qualified in Brazil in 1993, Dr Martins had practiced medicine for over 30 years and ran a private gynaecology and fertility clinic in North London, maintaining an unblemished disciplinary record prior to these events. The panel also acknowledged that Mr B had expressed no regret over receiving the weight-loss treatment itself and that Dr Martins had eventually demonstrated genuine remorse during the tribunal proceedings.

Despite these mitigating factors, the tribunal determined that her dishonesty was sustained over a two-month period and required a formal sanction to protect the public interest and uphold professional standards. In October 2025, the tribunal imposed an initial nine-month suspension.

Following a statutory review hearing conducted by the MPTS, her suspension was extended by an additional six months after the panel found her fitness to practise remained impaired, extending her bar from medical practice into 2027.

Explore More Local North London News

Arriva Bus Drivers Strike Over Unbearable Cabs Heatwave North London 2026

Camden Completes Ten New Affordable Family Homes in Somers Town 2026

What Is The Background Of The Development After The News?

The disciplinary action against Dr Josevania Martins takes place against the backdrop of rapidly expanding public demand for GLP-1 receptor agonist medications, such as semaglutide (marketed under trade names including Ozempic and Wegovy).

Originally developed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, these injectable medications have gained widespread global prominence for their efficacy in managing clinical obesity and driving significant weight loss.

While Wegovy is approved by the National Health Service (NHS) for specific weight-management criteria under strict clinical supervision, Ozempic is primarily licensed in the UK for diabetes management.

The dramatic surge in off-label demand for weight-loss treatments has created unprecedented challenges for regulatory bodies, including the GMC and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

In response to heightening commercial and private demand, health authorities have repeatedly reinforced strict prescribing protocols.

The General Medical Council has issued updated notices to private practitioners reminding them that weight-loss medications carry significant clinical indications, contraindications, and potential side effects, requiring thorough patient assessments, verified medical histories, and continuous clinical oversight.

Furthermore, the MPTS and GMC have intensified their scrutiny of private prescribing practices, particularly those operating outside traditional NHS governance structures or online private clinics.

Dr Martins’ case underscores the regulatory mandate that administrative convenience, personal relationships, or privacy considerations cannot override fundamental duties of clinical transparency, accurate medical record-keeping, and professional objectivity.

How Can This Development Affect Medical Professionals And The Public?

The suspension and subsequent extension handed to Dr Josevania Martins carry direct consequences for medical practitioners, private healthcare providers, and patients across the United Kingdom.

For doctors and private healthcare practitioners, this ruling serves as an uncompromising precedent regarding the strict enforcement of GMC prescribing guidelines.

The MPTS panel’s rejection of “privacy protection” as a defense clarifies that doctors cannot utilize fictitious practice details or alias names under any circumstances when issuing official legal documentation.

Practitioners who attempt to bypass professional boundaries to treat family members, partners, or personal acquaintances face severe disciplinary sanctions, including prolonged suspensions or permanent erasure from the medical register, regardless of their prior length of service or clinical reputation.

For the general public and prospective patients, particularly those seeking private treatments for weight management or fertility care, the case underscores the critical importance of verifiable physician transparency. Patients rely on regulatory oversight to ensure that individuals issuing prescriptions are fully accountable, properly identified, and operating within licensed clinical environments.

By penalising non-disclosure and deceitful prescribing practices, the tribunal’s decision seeks to reinforce public confidence that medical care in the UK remains bound by rigorous standards of consent, safety, and institutional integrity.