discipline summaries
2. Is the applicant suitable to practise both in terms
of protection of the public and the confidence of the
public in the profession’s ability to govern itself?
What is the physician’s current mental health and
future prognosis?
All witnesses were in agreement that Dr. Manohar’s
physical, as well as mental health was normal. There was
no evidence of a DSM-5 diagnosis. Although some testing demonstrated or suggested a degree of narcissism,
this was considered by both experts to be within the
normal range for a high functioning individual.
Has the physician made attempts at restitution in addition to demonstrating remorse and contrition?
Dr. Manohar was the subject of a civil suit. He testified
that the settlement in that action resulted in him selling
his home. Although the Committee was not provided
with any further details, the suggestion was that some
payment had been made to the complainant. This was
not a voluntary act of restitution, given the lawsuit, but
the Committee acknowledges that there were financial
consequences for Dr. Manohar.
What is the physician’s current level of knowledge,
skill and judgment?
To the extent that it is possible to make a judgment in
the absence of a formal assessment and practice evaluation, the Committee found that Dr. Manohar has made
significant efforts to remain current in his knowledge of
practice.
Dr. Manohar has maintained a program of continuing education that is entirely appropriate for a family
physician. The evidence in his portfolio for continuing
education showed that he was industrious, involved
and received highly positive evaluations. Although it
would be necessary to incorporate a period of retraining, as part of a return to practice, Dr. Manohar appeared to have maintained the knowledge base suitable
for practice.
What is the physician’s present character, will he
practise medicine with decency and integrity and
honesty and in accordance with the law?
It was the view of the Committee that all evidence
heard at this hearing confirmed that Dr. Manohar
had undergone a significant and substantial change in
attitude and behaviour which was likely to be persistent. An expert testified that Dr. Manohar’s somewhat
narcissistic traits meant that the humiliation, the loss of
everything he had achieved and the effect of the revocation were so shattering that he would, in her words, do
anything to avoid this happening again. The Committee
was particularly aware of the predictive nature of previous behaviour in a general sense, but was convinced by
the evidence that this was not likely to be the case with
Dr. Manohar.
What would be the impact of the physician’s readmission on the reputation of the profession?
The Committee took note that the independent Task
Force on the Sexual Abuse of Patients (1991) initially
recommended a “lifetime ban” penalty for such offences. However, they modified this recommendation
recognizing that a small proportion of offenders could
be rehabilitated and return safely to practice. The Committee conc