AN AYR optician who claims coloured lenses can help autistic people with sight issues has been struck off. 

Ian Jordan, who runs Jordaneyes in Newmarket Street, overstepped his authority by diagnosing conditions and recommending the lenses, was described as having an ‘inflated and unwarranted confidence in his own professional abilities’ by the General Optical Council (GOC).

The GOC fitness to practice committee heard that Jordan, who has published a book on the subject of autism and has spoken at national conferences, had treated several patients in contravention of of medical rules, while overstating the benefits.

He had previously been suspended for 12 months, ahead of a review last week.

The charges included diagnosing several patients with prosopagnosia or face blindness - a condition often found with autistic patients - without having the required qualifications to do so. 

On other occasions Jordan was reported to have recommended tinted lenses without consultation with a qualified optometrist. He was also found to have failed to record details and treatment of patients.

The committee also heard that one patient had been recommended tinted lenses by Jordan despite being treated for a brain injury at the time and was ‘highly emotional and distressed’.

At the time of the original hearing the committee found there was ‘no justified scientific basis for the recommendation of tinted lenses to treat the brain injury and resultant diplopia and indeed, the committee accepted the evidence that such a recommendation could have been specifically detrimental to the ocular condition.

“In the view of the Committee the assessment of and then recommendation of different coloured tinted lenses for Patient A is simply another example of his personal and professional over-confidence and his overall self- belief in the positive effect of his largely experimental practice.” 

The committee heard that Jordan had attempted to waive concerns about the amount of time children should wear the tinted lenses - reportedly saying that they would be able to use them correctly as they ‘aren’t daft’.

It was also accepted that there was positive feedback from the families of those who had used tinted lenses.

Cassandra Scarbrough, the GOC’s representative argued that Jordan’s conduct  ‘fell far below what was to be expected of a dispensing optician’. 

Ms Scarbrough told the hearing that investigations showed that Jordan was unable to ‘self-regulate’ his practice and highlighted the vulnerability of his patients. 

She added that Jordan had “misplaced and inflated ideas of his own place in the clinical hierarchy.

“There was potential for harm to his patients, many of whom were very young and/or had very challenging conditions.”

Jordan had ‘appeared to show little appreciation of the vulnerability of his patients and the role of their carers’ in ensuring informed consent’

However, he did accepted that he deals with ‘complex and challenging patients’. 

Jordan had waived his right to represent himself beyond the documentary evidence he provided to the committee. 

The report stated that he neither recognised his failings nor intended to alter his practice in any way.  

It said: “These failings were numerous and extended over a long time. They necessarily would have the effect of compromising patients’ safety and of lowering public trust and confidence in the profession.”

The committee said the decision to erase him from their register was the only option to ‘protect patients’.