An expert on Munchhausen's syndrome by proxy is facing investigation by the General Medical Council after parents complained that he wrongly diagnosed their children as victims of abuse, it emerged today.

Consultant paediatrician Professor David Southall, of North Staffordshire hospital in Stoke-on-Trent, is renowned for his work on the condition, which apparently drives parents to harm their own children in order to win attention.

The syndrome has been the centre of controversy after a series of court judgements cast doubt on the credibility of the doctor who first identified it, Professor Sir Roy Meadow.

BBC Radio 4's Today programme reported that four women had complained to the GMC that Prof Southall wrongly diagnosed abuse of their children. The women alleged that medical opinions from other doctors contradicted his findings. In some cases, children are understood to have been taken into care as a result of Prof Southall's diagnosis.

The allegations are expected to be dealt with in a public hearing at the GMC in June.

A spokeswoman for the GMC said the organisation's preliminary proceedings committee (PCC) had considered two complaints relating to Professor David Southall on February 26.

"After examination of the evidence they have decided not to proceed with one of the complaints. The other complaint was referred to the professional conduct committee."

The spokeswoman added that Professor Southall was due to appear before the PCC some time this summer over a separate matter. She declined to give details of any of the complaints.

Prof Southall has previously sparked controversy over his use of video surveillance of parents to detect child abuse.

The University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust declined to comment on the GMC investigation but pointed out that previous investigations into Prof Southall's work had cleared him of misconduct.

His child protection work was examined by a panel of independent experts in a number of case reviews, which found that he acted in a way that promoted the best interests of children in his care and took decisions in collaboration with colleagues from other agencies.

It did not find any evidence of inappropriate diagnosis, and a separate inquiry found no evidence of incompetence or serious professional misconduct, a trust statement said.