An osteopath has been suspended after she had an affair with a married patient - whose wife was a patient at the same clinic.
Rachel Say, 47, texted her male patient and told him about her 'conflicting feelings' after the married man got her a Valentine's Day card.
She invited him to her home to help her with DIY work and they shared a kiss, a tribunal heard.
When the patient's wife found out she said they were getting a divorce and then went to the clinic - where she was also a patient - and complained to Ms Say's boss.
Ms Say, who is American, was found to have 'ignored red flags' because she wanted a sexual relationship with the patient and breached 'sexual and professional boundaries'.
She has now had her licence to practice suspended for three months by the General Osteopath Council over her 'dishonest and sexually motivated' behaviour.
Ms Say qualified as an osteopath in 2019 and at the time was working at Derby Cottage Clinic in Newmarket, Suffolk.
She treated Patient A for musculoskeletal back pain between May 2024 and February 2025.
Patient A's wife, Patient B, was also treated at the clinic but by another osteopath.
At an unknown date before Christmas, Ms Say and Patient A exchanged phone numbers and 'sporadically' texted around the festive period.
At one of their appointments Ms Say asked patient A to buy her American snacks - as she was American - and he returned at their next appointment on February 12 with 'Goldfish' snacks in a bag with a Valentine's Day card.
Patient A text Ms Say telling her he hoped he had not 'overstepped the mark' and that he 'valued their friendship'.
He added: 'You are an amazing listener, mom, friend, and someone I want to be around for sure I'm just following my gut and if you don't feel the same that is completely fine and I absolutely get it.'
Ms Say replied: 'Thank you so much for the card. It's lovely and a very sweet message.
'I also value your friendship and I do look forward to keeping in touch. The only thing I struggle with is professional boundaries - on my part.
'I honestly haven't had conflicting feelings about any other person I've met through work.
'I really enjoy our conversations. You're interesting, thoughtful and kind. Your gut isn't wrong - I just don't want to muddle anything while you're my patient.'
After that appointment, Ms Say told the patient that he would have to find another osteopath because they could not continue a medical relationship.
He agreed but asked if they could remain friends, to which she consented.
But two days later, on Valentine's Day, Ms Say messaged Patient A and asked him to come over to her house to help her with some electrical work.
Patient A told his wife that he was seeing a male friend but then admitted he was doing electrical work for the osteopath.
Ms Say described their meeting: 'That evening, or the following day, he asked if I still needed help with the lights.
'I was unsure, but he expressed a desire to see the new clinic and offered to visit on the Wednesday.
'On 19th February, he helped me to assemble a chair at the clinic and visited my home to assess the light fixture.
'When he left, there was a brief, slightly awkward, kiss goodbye.'
Patient A had left in the early afternoon and did not return in time for dinner so his wife confronted him, and he confessed to his wife that he had feelings for the osteopath and that they had kissed.
She was upset and told Patient A, their children and even his mother that they were getting a divorce before going to the clinic to complain to Ms Say's boss.
The boss confronted Ms Say, who was surprised as Patient A had always told her that he and his wife were mutually separating and that she knew and was supportive of their relationship.
She said that one of the reasons for her 'ill-judged' actions was because she had not been back to America for five years and had been working a lot - so was 'completely and utterly burned out'.
The case was brought before a General Osteopath Council (GOC) tribunal.
The tribunal found: 'The evidence before the panel was that [Ms Say] and Patient A had shared intimate information, had kissed and had spent time together at [Ms Say's] home.
'[Ms Say] had described it as platonic 'up to when it wasn't' and said that there had been physical involvement.
'[MsSay] had on one occasion ensured Patient A left her home before her son returned because she did not want them to 'overlap'.
'That, it seemed to the Committee, was inconsistent with Patient A visiting to assist with an electrical issue in the context of a friendship which was purely platonic.
'In the Committee's view, if [MsSay] had not been interested in pursuing an intimate relationship with Patient A, she would not have ignored a number of red flags which were clearly present.'
'The only sensible explanation for [MsSay's] conduct in maintaining contact with Patient A is that it was done in the pursuit of a future sexual relationship.'
It concluded: 'The Committee had found that [MsSay] engaged in conduct with Patient A which was inappropriate, sexually motivated and amounted to a breach of sexual and professional boundaries.
'In the circumstances of this case, the Committee determined that a three-month suspension order was appropriate and proportionate.'
Ms Say will require a review hearing at the end of the three-month period before she returns to practice.
Ms Say said last night: 'The GOC found I was not a threat to the public, that my clinical competence was not an issue and that all this took place after I had stopped him being a client.'