Dialogue Volume 10 Issue 1 2014 | Page 38

DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES DR. BERNARD NORMAN BARWIN Practice Location: Ottawa Practice Area: General Practice Hearing Information: Agreed Statement of Facts, Admission, Joint Submission on Penalty On January 31, 2013, the Discipline Committee found that Dr. Barwin committed an act of professional misconduct, in that he has failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession. Dr. Barwin had admitted to the allegation. Dr. Barwin is a general practitioner with additional training in obstetrics and gynecology. His practice included a substantial component of artificial insemination, among other areas of medicine since 1973. Patient A became pregnant in 2004 as a result of artificial insemination conducted by Dr. Barwin. Approximately three years later, Patient A found out, through DNA testing, that her child was not the product of the donor sperm she had instructed Dr. Barwin to use to inseminate her. In or about late 2006/early 2007, Patient B went to Dr. Barwin with her sister, Patient C, who had agreed to act as Patient B’s surrogate. Dr. Barwin was to artificially inseminate Patient C with the sperm of Patient B’s husband. Patient C discovered, through DNA testing in 2008, that her child was not the biological child of Patient B’s husband. In or about 1985 and 1986, Patient D went to Dr. Barwin for the purpose of being artificially inseminated with her husband’s sperm. In approximately 2011, Patient D discovered, through DNA testing, that her son was not her husband’s biological child. The errors in the inseminations of Patients A and C occurred after Dr. Barwin had been notified by the College of an error he made in his insemination of another patient, Patient E, in 1994. Patient E discovered, following the birth of her child in June 1995, that the child was not the product of the donor sperm she had instructed Dr. Barwin to use to inseminate her. Dr. Barwin was notified of this error by the College and states