A patient has told how her life was ‘ruined’ after two operations by a disgraced surgeon and accused him of 'playing God'.

Jennifer Hill, now 77, underwent surgery to have mesh inserted by Anthony Dixon – supposedly to support her bowel alignment.

Her condition is now so bad she requires a heavily restricted diet, has difficulty eating out, struggles with all long journeys from home and holidays – and potentially faces having to be fitted with a stoma bag.

Giving a horrific account of how her life has changed after the operations, Mrs Hill accused the surgeon of ‘playing God’ with patients' lives – adding: ‘He’s taken everything away from me – mentally, physically, socially.’

Dixon, who pioneered a technique known as mesh rectopexy to treat bowel problems, was struck off last year after two medical tribunals found he falsified patient records and failed to gain informed consent for procedures.

Complaints began to be made against the surgeon, who operated on over 400 patients on the NHS at Bristol's Southmead Hospital and privately at the city’s Spire Hospital, from 2017.

Last month, the Daily Mail revealed £20m compensation has been paid out by the NHS alone in settlements to former patients. Many millions more is understood to have been paid by Spire and Dixon’s own insurer.

According to campaign group Sling the Mesh, women treated by Dixon, now 65, suffered ‘horrific complications’ including chronic pain, nerve damage, and mesh erosion - where the implant slices into nearby organs and tissues.

Mrs Hill, a retired school assistant, said: ‘He was the worst person I could have been referred to. I wish we’d had a second opinion but you trust, you pay, you do.’

The mother-of-two and grandmother-of-three said she was treated privately at Bristol’s Spire Hospital after suffering ‘really chronic’ irritable bowel syndrome.

Her husband, marine engineer Eric Hill, now 69, funded the initial £5,000 cost of treatment by cashing in shares, to avoid what Dixon advised would be a two-year wait on the NHS and seemingly with better private care.

Mrs Hill recalled: ‘Originally, I went to a gastroenterologist. Having failed to resolve my IBS issues, after multiple diagnostic tests and treatments, he said: I’ve someone I can refer you to, which was Mr Dixon, also at the Spire.’

Mrs Hill and her husband ‘trusted Spire, buying into what they described as a ‘total care package’.

She said neither she nor her husband ‘really challenged’ Dixon ahead of the operation in May 2012 – but bitterly wish they had.

She recalled: ‘He said, ‘I’ve lots of women like you, who have had botched hysterectomies, I’ve had to come in and mend you all’. It was very jovial.’

After the treatment, carried out by keyhole surgery, she spent three days in hospital and was then discharged while still feeling very unwell, only to be then readmitted before leaving the premises.

She said: ‘It was then discovered by nursing staff that I was not passing urine and required a catheter.’

Worse still, Mrs Hill, of Wellington, Somerset, said the operation made no difference and her condition worsened.

She said: ‘He (Dixon) didn’t address the IBS, he just addressed the supposed bowel alignment issues.’

Her husband told how Mrs Hill ended up going back to seeing Mr Dixon in July 2016, ‘completely oblivious to the controversy around mesh’.

The Hills told how Dixon then conducted further tests including a ‘transit study’ which involved swallowing marked pills to see where they end up in the digestive system.

Mrs Hill said Dixon told her that her colon was dead, without evidence being shown and advocated part of it should be removed.

She recalled: ‘We wished we’d got a second opinion.

‘I was also constantly unwell during this period and desperate for a solution.’’

In a further operation, costing £10,000, Mrs Hill ‘agreed to have it (a section of colon) removed ‘thinking it would resolve my issues after all these years’.

She said: ‘Whilst I was under, he put in a more biological mesh which I didn’t need.

‘He reasoned the old synthetic one was in a ‘rat’s tail’-type state so he also took that out.’

‘My strong belief is that it was the synthetic mesh that was causing me severe problems at that time and that the removal of my colon was totally unnecessary.

‘When it was apparent that the original mesh had failed the operation should have been halted, the findings discussed with me once recovered and a way ahead agreed, rather than just ploughing on without any thought as to what I wanted and needed’.

Mrs Hill said she was also left with a highly embarrassing recto-vaginal fistula, persisting for many months post the operation.

Again, Mrs Hill found the surgery made no difference to her IBS.

Instead, she said: ‘It has made my life a misery ever since. I don’t feel whole as a woman. He’s taken that away from me.

‘I have to colonically irrigate multiple times every day. I’m worse now than when I saw him in 2012. I am constantly in pain, losing weight and extremely lethargic.’

She said: ‘He was acting as a pilot for mesh but it could be seen that it didn’t work. He played God. It makes me so angry.

‘He’s damaged me mentally, physically, socially. I still try and do things. I go to Pilates and choir. I try to keep living and not to give up, but it’s a daily struggle.

‘Even now, I have to wear sanitary protection frequently – I have such a delicate and unpredictable system.’

Referring to the 2018 suicide of one of Dixon’s former patients - Lucinda Methuen-Campbell, 58, who was left in chronic pain after having vaginal mesh inserted and her ovaries removed to treat a bowel condition because they were ‘in the way’ - Mrs Hill said: ‘I can empathise with that lady, thinking of the pain she and others must have endured.’

Mrs Hill was also horrified when Dixon made an unsuccessful bid for anonymity in compensation cases being brought against him at the High Court in 2022 – claiming stress caused by negative publicity was causing ‘loss of libido’.

She said: ‘When we saw the article about Dixon and his libido, you just think about all the patients he’s damaged.’

Describing the continued impact on her day-to-day life, Mrs Hill said: ‘I’m really so restricted about what to eat. That’s one of the many things he’s taken away.

‘I have to go to extraordinary lengths in an attempt to experience normal pleasurable activity. If I fly, it’s a nightmare as airlines, restaurants and bathrooms just don’t cater for these situations.

‘To cope, I either have to starve myself or have a very bland diet with very small quantities. I can eat steamed rice, steamed fish, steamed chicken. I can’t have fried meals in batter.

‘If I do try to dine out, I have to pre-arrange this, which invariably goes wrong, spoiling the occasion and having to go without food.

‘Anything taken inadvertently spicy, I have to rush to the toilet. Restaurants can do gluten, lactose allergies but it’s very hard to get through about my requirements. I can’t even go out for a coffee.

‘We’ve tried cruising, as they go to great lengths to cater for special diets - you have a dedicated waiter and receive the menu 24 hours in advance so the chefs can prepare for your needs. It makes life a lot easier.

'I still have to stick to a basic meal which is very bland, tasteless and repetitive.

‘It’s hell to go on holiday, to go in any transport. I’m getting more and more unwell. I’m losing weight all the time, (constantly) going to the bathroom.’

Mrs Hill received a settlement from Dixon’s insurers in 2024 - having claimed via Thompsons Solicitors, which has represented over 100 of the surgeon’s former patients.

But she said: ‘It wasn’t an awful lot of money and doesn’t cover anything, nor will it ever resolve my issues. It was paid by his insurers. Spire wouldn’t accept liability.’

Mrs Hill said Spire began approaching Dixon’s patients in 2018, offering to fund investigation work and remedial treatments.

It led to another Spire consultant, Paul Durdy, proposing a bowel ‘modulation system’ using battery-operated electrodes to stimulate movement.

Although ‘extremely scared’, Mrs Hill agreed to the procedure because she was ‘always in a state of wondering, how can I get better’.

She said a temporary system improved matters – but a permanent one didn’t and it was later taken out.

In 2021, an NHS surgeon tried repeating the treatment, initially using a temporary electrode which also worked and inexplicably a permanent system which didn’t and was removed last year.

Mrs Hill said the experience of being part of the GMC case against Dixon was also traumatic as she had to be ‘in an on-line room on my own with no support or chaperone’ and could not speak to her husband about the proceedings.

In a ‘very stringent’ medical tribunal hearing, she was ‘grilled’ about aspects of her personal life and inappropriate comments and behaviour by Dixon towards her and her husband.

She said she was left feeling ‘as though she was the perpetrator and not the person who had been harmed’.

‘It was his word against mine and there was no independent evidence,’ she recalled.

‘He (Dixon) even kept my 2012 and 2016 ‘thank you’ cards which I sent to him and staff out of politeness because I’m an appreciative person - also (I was) oblivious to the controversy around mesh and concern about his activities.

‘Everything was thrown against you, even the cards.’

Mrs Hill’s solicitor Linda Millband, of Thompsons Solicitors, said: ‘We have represented over 100 patients affected by Anthony Dixon’s treatment, many of whom continue to live with the lasting consequences of the care they received.

‘While the tribunal identified failings and he has faced professional sanction, for those impacted the effects remain profound.’

The Dixon case is said to be one of the worst in recent UK medical history, although the number of victims is lower than the 1,000 who received ‘unnecessary surgery’ from breast surgeon Ian Paterson, who was jailed for 20 years in 2017.

Claims by Mrs Hill were part of the first tribunal against Dixon, which ruled in July 2024, finding his fitness to practise was ‘impaired through misconduct’.

In relation to Mrs Hill, the tribunal found he had made an ‘entirely inappropriate’ comment as a ‘throwaway’ remark to her husband which the GMC said was ‘clearly distressing for the patient and her partner, and amounted to serious misconduct’.

The tribunal highlighted Dixon’s failure to consider the option of ‘no treatment at all’ for Mrs Hill, which GMC barrister Chloe Fairley said reflected ‘Mr Dixon’s focus on surgical options as opposed to a wholesale review of all the options available to a patient’.

Speaking via his insurers, Dixon said: ‘I have always endeavoured to provide the highest standard of care to my patients. I cannot comment on individual patient care due to patient confidentiality.’

A Spire spokesperson said: ‘We undertook a comprehensive review of patients who underwent certain procedures by Mr Dixon at Spire Bristol Hospital and would like to apologise again to Mrs Hill and other patients who did not receive an acceptable standard of care.

‘We have continued to strengthen our standards and processes since the time when Mr Dixon practiced with us. We have stringent quality standards and clinical governance, which consultants are required to follow as a condition of working in our facilities.

‘If any Spire Bristol patients have concerns about their care under Mr Dixon, they should call our dedicated helpline on 0800 783 8163 or email bristolhosphelpline@spirehealthcare.com’