Senior doctors, a judge, nurses and social workers yesterday urged the General Medical Council not to end the "pioneering" career of David Southall, a leading consultant paediatrician, because of one error of judgment.

They said that said striking Professor Southall, 56, off the medical register would have a "catastrophic" impact on the demoralised paediatric profession.

The consultant has been found guilty of abusing his professional position by accusing a father of murdering his two babies on the basis of watching a television documentary.

The GMC disciplinary panel met yesterday in Manchester to consider whether this amounted to serious professional misconduct - and if so, what sanction they should impose.

In a measure of how the work of Prof Southall, a child abuse expert, divides opinion, mothers who claim he wrongly accused them of harming their babies sat in the public gallery taking copious notes at the hearing in Manchester yesterday. One left the room in tears.

Richard Tyson, representing Stephen Clark, who was accused by Prof Southall of being a double murderer, said nothing less than the removal of an "arrogant, dogmatic and dangerous" doctor from the medical register would protect the public.

Accusation

He said Prof Southall had refused to accept that he had been wrong when he made the accusation against Mr Clark on the flimsiest of evidence.

His actions could have resulted in Mr Clark's surviving child being taken from his care and the father being sent to prison.

"A doctor who arrogantly continues to believe he is right is a very dangerous doctor," Mr Tyson said. "This is especially so where he is a doctor who practises in the extremely sensitive and important field of child protection ... a field where on a consultant paediatrician's say so families can legally be split asunder or parents convicted of very serious crimes against their children. The public needs to be protected."

Prof Southall, whose 30-year career has included controversial research into child abuse and infant respiratory problems, sat with his head in his hands at the hearing in Manchester as his lawyer read from a 142-page document containing endorsements of his work in the UK and abroad from more than 85 professionals.

The letters acknowledged that he was a man who could be obsessive and passionate about child protection. But they paid tribute to his work as a leader in his field, a "courageous" innovator who had saved the lives of many children, and in the case of his work abroad had done so at risk to his own safety.

Sir David Hall, a consultant paediatrician in Sheffield, said he understood that Prof Southall, from North Staffordshire district hospital in Stoke-on-Trent, had been criticised by the GMC for the way in which he intervened in the Clark case.

But he compared that to his whole career. The doctor's use of covert video surveillance of parents suspected of child abuse had made an "invaluable contribution" to society's understanding of the issue.

People like Prof Southall were rare, he added. "In an era when many paediatricians are extremely reluctant to get involved in child abuse cases, or stand out against the tide of opinion for fear of complaints against them, he will do what he believes to be right without counting the cost to himself."

He added that his enforced retirement from the profession would have a catastrophic effect on morale among paediatricians.

Robert Pugh, consultant paediatrician from Mid Cheshire Hospitals NHS trust, said while all doctors could make errors of judgment he believed Prof Southall had acted with good intentions to protect a child.

"I hope and pray that the GMC will not delete this doctor from the register," he said. "This would be a setback for all doctors working in the field of child protection where there is already diminishing morale and poor recruitment."

Register

But Mr Tyson said Mr Clark wanted the committee to seriously consider striking him off the register.

Prof Southall had contacted police to allege that it was Mr Clark not his wife who had killed their babies, Christopher, 11 weeks, and Harry, eight weeks, after watching a Channel 4 Dispatches programme four years ago about his fight to clear his wife's name.

At the time Mrs Clark was serving life for the murders. She later had her convictions quashed on appeal.

The paediatrician spoke to police officers, social workers and experts in the case and filed a report stating his "near certainty to certainty" that Mr Clark was a double murderer. He told the authorities he believed the couple's surviving child was in danger in his care.

Mr Tyson said the doctor had shown "dogmatic self-belief" and had never apologised for the false allegation or accepted responsibility for his actions.

At a time when public confidence in paediatricians was low the GMC had to send an important message that such actions would not be tolerated, he said.

"If confidence in doctors, especially in paediatricians, correctly identifying true cases of abuse is in some sort of crisis the only way to restore public confidence and get more paediatricians to be involved in this sensitive, difficult and important work is for this committee to take strong effective and public action against paediatricians such as Prof Southall."

The doctor will learn his fate later today.