OMER Butt, a Manchester dentist, is facing disciplinary action for the second time in two years for insisting that his Muslim patients wear appropriate Islamic gear when being treated – “in order to protect his honour”.
According to this report, at least two patients were left in pain after they declined to follow the rules at his NHS dental clinic in Bury, Lancashire.
Two years ago he was reprimanded by the General Dental Council for telling an Asian mother-of-two he would not register her unless she wore the Muslim hijab.
Butt, 32, allegedly said it was duty to ensure Muslim women wore the hijab at his NHS dental clinic in Bury, Lancashire.
The GDC heard how Butt believed it was his duty to stop Muslim patients committing what he believed was “a religious sin”.
He even put a laminated sign on the wall of his waiting room telling patients they would have to adhere to his strict dress code or find another dentist.
John Snell, for the GDC, said:
He sought to impose a dress code on patients attending his practice. He required that women cover their hair with a head scarf, or hijab, and that male patients remove any gold jewellery.
If he had simply expressed a preference, without imposing any compulsion to adhere to this dress code, there may be no cause for complaint. However, he insisted – and those who did not comply were refused treatment.
Snell added:
He made compliance with Islamic dress code a condition of treatment, which is entirely inappropriate under the auspices of the National Health Service.
Patients should have access to NHS treatment regardless of their religious observance, or otherwise.
One patient, referred to only as Mrs F, told how she went with her husband and three children to register as patients at the Unsworth Smile Clinic, in Bury, Lancashire, in 2006.
While they were waiting to be seen, Butt called her husband into an office and told him he would have to tell his wife to wear a head scarf or the family would not be seen.
They promptly left and made a formal complaint to the NHS.
Mrs F told the panel:
I was extremely annoyed. It’s my choice if I wear a Hijab or not. But he told my husband he wouldn’t treat any of us until I did. He even offered to provide one for me to use, but I didn’t want to wear it. I shouldn’t have to wear it to get treatment.
I had great pain in my tooth at the time, but I wasn’t going to stand for that so we left.
Another patient and her family had to leave the clinic in June 2007 because she would not wear the religious headdress after spending a year looking for a dentist in the area, the hearing was told.
The woman’s husband, known as Mr C, was also called into a private room at the surgery where Butt asked him to impose a dress code on his wife.
His wife said:
My husband came out and he looked quite angry and his face was red. He said ‘let’s go’.
Butt, of Prestwich, Manchester, denies charges of misconduct for his treatment of two patients at the clinic.
If found guilty he faces being removed the dental register.
In September 2007 Butt was formally reprimanded by the GDC for similar behaviour and found guilty of serious professional misconduct.
After learning of an earlier charge laid against him, Butt – the brother of a former spokesman of the radical Islamic group al-Muhajiroun – wrote to the council praising Allah, according to this report. He referred to the patient as his “sister” and concluded:
May Allah protect us all from the evils of Shaitan [Satan].
The woman, referred to as Patient A, went to see Mr Butt at his clinic in April, 2005. He asked her if she was a Muslim and she asked him why it mattered. He said he needed to know.
The nurse allegedly told her:
Inside the surgery it is Mr Butt’s world and his rules that apply.
Andrew Hockton, defending the dentist at the 2007 hearing, said that Mr Butt asked Muslim women to cover everything except their hands and faces “in order to protect his honour”.
The latest hearing, being held in London, continues.
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
May 10th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Oh my butt!! The only reason that Muslim women are forced to cover up is that the crackpot founder of their "faith" suffered from extreme paranoia, and believed that all men were lusting after his wives! How on earth can erstwhile sensible, intelligent people go along with all this nonsense in the twenty-first century?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:26 am
I wouldn’t rely too heavily on reports from the Daily Mail. They love whipping up hysteria about Muslims, and can’t be relied upon to present the story fairly, or even truthfully.
According to this report from the BBC, he claims he “requested” female patients wear the headscarf, and did not withold treatment from patients who refused. It’s still not on, but it’s not as bad as teh Mail is trying to make out.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_.....012931.stm
May 10th, 2009 at 11:10 am
He needs to be extracted.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:41 am
His honor is a fragile little thing, isn't it?
May 10th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
He should go and set up an in house practice within a mosque.
Incidentally for those that have any doubt that Religion Brainwashes children take a look at this little gem of an indoctrination
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....;fe…
May 10th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
What's the betting this Andrew Hockton is slapping himself on the back for "upholding the multicultural society of the 21st century" behind his guardian?
May 10th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
The sad thing is that without religion this guy would be a valuable member of society, instead he is a dysfunctional crackwit. What other people choose to wear is their own business and F all to do with him. He absolutely deserves to be fired, why do I get the inevitable feeling that he won't be due to the people resposible having no backbones. If he had refused to treat my wife like this when she was in pain I think I might have been tempted to resort to violence.
May 10th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
What a dumbass. When he gets canned I wonder how many cheerleaders will be around playing the "religious persecution" card.
May 10th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
He is a religious wack-a-Loon but he has his right to be so. The thing is does he inform his potential patients that he is one??? The question of forcing him thru any means to work on all patients is not good. I would NEVER want to be worked on by a Theistard of any kind because you will never know what will set them off. I would prefer to know who they are so I can avoid them. When they have very few patients they will be forced out by economics. And don't forget he is islam which means he will have a large group of cheerleaders who also use intimidation.
May 11th, 2009 at 7:22 am
barriejohn is a wacko as well, and this server lets him harass other contributers but buries common sense responses. So much for freethought.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Ha! Norman Lycan claiming that his comments are "common sense"!! That`s the funniest thing I`ve read for ages!!!
May 11th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Oh, Norman an alter-ego of you-know-who or a new one? Is he a koranimal himself or does he reckon that people should be able to "express thier sincerely-held beleifs"? (with intimidation, threats, knives and explosives).
Actually, "Lycan"? Not one of these Pagans is he? Attention-seeking twats
May 11th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
From some of the above posts it seems that some people are complaining about being censored by the moderator. This hasn't happened to me so far but if it did my first thought would be that it was me that was out of order. I have read unmoderated comment threads and they are incredibly tedious so although censorship is undesirable on forums such as this it is sometimes needed. I think it is also a very difficult balancing act.
May 11th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Nobody complaining on this thread has been censored – at least not deliberately. This new comments software is still in a trial period. It is a bit flaky.
Moderation of comments here at the FT is generally very liberal. You'd have to be pretty bad to get yourself barred – mindless evangelical repetitions, or exhortations to kill Muslims and join the BNP will do it.
I wouldn't call it censorship either. This is a privately owned website with both legal obligations and certain editorial standards. We have a right to choose whom we allow into our space, which we pay for – that doesn't mean they can't spout elsewhere at their own expense.
May 11th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Acknowledged, censorship was the wrong word and I apologise for using it. Even the witless and repetative Bob was given a very fair opportunity to put forward his views.
May 11th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
I have a feeling that Norman has posted a comment under another subject, and then jumped to the conclusion that he is being censored because he cannot find it under this one. How else can you explain the fact that I had made ONE comment here (strictly about Mr Butthead) and Lycan suddenly launches into a tirade about me being a "whacko" " harassing other contributors" (whatever that might mean!), while his own replies are "buried"!! (By the way, I do apologize to all those contributors, suffering from hurt feelings, whom I have so thoughtlessly "harrassed" : it will not happen again – well, not too soon anyway.)
May 12th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Maybe Norman is right Barrie. Maybe you are "Wako". You just don't understand? Covering yourself from head to toe in black cloth is 'liberating'. Don't you get it?
Godless not gormless
May 13th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Prestwich where I live is a small town north of Manchester and close to Bury. Considering its size I'm amazed that two stories in the last year or so have come out of it, the previous one was when the catholic school nearby witheld the jab for the teenage girls. Just thought I'd share that boring bit of info. with you all.
Butt-head has been on the local news quite a few times with the same old shit.
June 25th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Mad man
Send him back to Pakistan!!!
August 28th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
lol i kynda found it funni in away but omer butt has gpt a point muslim women shoul wear an hijab in farz.