discipline summaries
Huebel’s positive response to supervision and the fact
that both Dr. Huebel and his supervisor have been
very engaged with the College.
The Committee was encouraged by the positive
assessments made by the supervisor, Dr. T, following
his October 9, 2014, meeting with Dr. Huebel, and
by Dr. Y’s observation of Dr. Huebel’s assessment and
treatment of 14 patients. As well, Dr. S, the Chief of
Dr. Huebel’s emergency department, has commented
on noticeable improvements in Dr. Huebel’s clinical
practice over the past year.
Aggravating factors include Dr. Huebel’s previous
history with the College. Dr. Huebel received an oral
caution in 2004 and a written caution in 2006 from
the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee of
the College for similar issues.
The Committee considered that the proposed
penalty would uphold the relevant penalty principles
of public protection, specific and general deterrence, rehabilitation of the member and maintenance
of public confidence in self-regulation. Pursuant
to the undertaking signed January 13, 2015, Dr.
Huebel will continue practising under supervision
until December 31, 2015, which can be extended if
the supervisor deems it necessary. Dr. Huebel will
undergo two reassessments of his practice, the first at
18 months and the second at 24 months, which will
occur at approximately six months and one year after
his supervision ends. These measures should protect
the public and ensure that Dr. Huebel’s skills have
been remediated.
The public reprimand serves the objectives of specific deterrence to Dr. Huebel and general deterrence
to the profession. Also, the Committee determined
that it was an appropriate case to require Dr. Huebel
to pay the College costs for a one-day hearing in the
amount of $4,460.
3. Dr. Huebel pay costs to the College in the amount
of $4,460 within 60 days of the date of this Order.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Dr. Huebel waived his
right to an appeal and the Committee administered the
public reprimand.
Key Reprimand Points
• I n the view of the Committee, Dr. Huebel’s treatment of his patients was simply unacceptable. These
two cases taken in isolation would present serious
concerns about his ability to maintain the standards
of the profession. Reviewing Dr. Huebel’s history
of previous complaints and attempts at remediation before the present cases, the Committee was
appalled that he was before Discipline given the
ample opportunity to learn from all the previous
warnings, cautions and educational requirements.
• Protection of the public is not just a College ideal,
but the responsibility of every member of the
profession and of this College. As well, upholding
our ability to self-regulate and the public interest
depends on every member of the College.
• The Committee expects Dr. Huebel to change his
method of practice and to bring to bear full attention to detail in his care of patients and in documenting that care.
Full decisions are available online at www.cpso.on.ca.
Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor’s name.
Order
The Committee ordered and directed that:
1. Dr. Huebel appear before the panel to be reprimanded.
2. the Registrar impose the terms of Dr. Huebel’s
undertaking with the College dated January 13,
2015, as terms, conditions and limitations on Dr.
Huebel’s certificate of registration.
Issue 4, 2015 Dialogue
Issue4_15.indd 67
67
2015-12-16 9:36 AM