discipline summaries
that these discussions all related to the sequellae of the
accident rather than any issues related to her marriage. Patient A agreed that on occasion she mentioned
marital difficulties. However none of these notes indicated that Dr. BCD had any in-depth discussion with
Patient A about her marital difficulties.
She did admit to being unhappy with the pain and
physical limitations imposed by her accident and she
stated that she referred to this as “depression” with Dr.
BCD. Dr. BCD prescribed antidepressants for her,
and his discussions with Patient A on their use were
noted in follow-up on several occasions. She testified
that she told Dr. BCD she was taking the antidepressants infrequently but, in fact, she never took them at
all.
In June 2010, Patient A attended a scheduled appointment for the purpose of obtaining more paper
work relating to the motor vehicle accident, and having Dr. BCD complete a form necessary to help her
mother get a visa to come to Canada. At some point
during the appointment, Patient A asked Dr. BCD out
for coffee. She explained that she felt like she needed
to talk to someone as a friend that she trusted.
She testified that Dr. BCD stated that he could not
even go out with her for a coffee if she were to remain
his patient. According to Patient A, there was a mutual
agreement to dissolve the physician-patient relationship at that moment. She never had another medical
appointment with Dr. BCD.
Dr. BCD and Patient A went out for coffee that
same day. Patient A described nothing more intimate
occurring than the exchange of email addresses and
cell phone numbers. After this, she and Dr. BCD
began corresponding, predominantly by texting.
Patient A testified that she and Dr. BCD met several
times over the next few weeks. They took walks in the
park, met for coffee and went to restaurants together.
They kept in touch by texts and cell phone calls. Over
time she and Dr. BCD expressed their feelings for each
other. She thought perhaps it was after a couple of
weeks that they shared a “real hug” that lasted several
seconds. They first kissed only after their third, fourth
or fifth meeting.
Patient A testified that the first time she and Dr.
BCD had sexual intercourse was in November 2010. It
was put to her that she had told the College’s investigator, Mr. F, during an interview in September 2011,
that she and Dr. BCD first had sexual intercourse
in August 2010. She responded that she had been
mistaken in her answer to Mr. F’s question. She was
certain that there was no intercourse before November
2010 because she was suffering from heavy menstrual
bleeding and a very painful Bartholin’s cyst, which
precluded any attempt at intercourse until after she
had surgery to correct the problem that month.
Findings
Sexual Abuse
This case turned on the evidence of one witness,
Patient A, who is at the centre of the allegations of
sexual abuse. Patient A was the only witness who had
first-hand knowledge of the events that formed the
basis of the allegations against Dr. BCD. Patient A had
initially refused to cooperate with the investigation
of Dr. BCD and subsequently sought to be excused
from having to testify against him. She was clear that
she felt Dr. BCD had done nothing improper, and she
testified that they had a very deep and loving relationship that blended their two families. The Committee
was also aware that she had significant motivation
to minimize her relationship with Dr. BCD during
2010, as a finding against Dr. BCD on either allegation would very negatively impact her and their now
blended family.
While the Committee felt that aspects of Patient A’s
testimony, particularly about events after the termination of the physician-patient relationship, were not
entirely credible, on the critical issue of when the
physician-patient relationship ended, Patient A gave
clear and consistent evidence that it ended in June
2010. No other evidence was adduced to contradict
her on this point.
The College submitted that the physician-patient
relationship continued until September 2010, which
was the date on which Dr. BCD transferred Patient A’s
medical records to her new physician or, alternatively,
in August 2010, which was when Dr. BCD received
Patient A’s signed consent to transfer the records. The
College noted that there was nothing documented in
the chart that indicated that Dr. BCD had dissolved
the physician-patient relationship at any particular
time, and no letter was sent to Patient A making it
clear that she was no longer his patient.
In the Committee’s view, the absence of a notation
Issue 3, 2015 Dialogue
69