discipline summaries these prescribing rights on receipt of the expert report . The requirement to post a sign , in English and in Spanish , in a clearly visible location in his office , informing patients of this prohibition is a further measure of public protection . The requirement to complete a course in medical record keeping will serve to correct the substandard practice deficiencies identified by the medical inspector . Few , if any , physicians can be unaware of the College policy prohibiting more than incidental or emergency treatment of family members or others with whom the physician has a close personal relationship . The provision of optimal care requires the objectivity inherent in an “ arm ’ s length ” doctor / patient relationship . That Dr . Esmond violated this policy repeatedly and over a prolonged period of time is beyond question . Equally serious in the eyes of the Committee was the provision to , and receipt of , care from another physician over whom Dr . Esmond agreed to take a supervisory role , in violation of a mentor / mentee relationship , sacred since the time of Hippocrates . The imposition of a significant suspension and the public reprimand clearly demonstrates the abhorrence of the profession for this behaviour . Counsel for Dr . Esmond submitted that he had cooperated fully with the College investigation and that in agreeing to the allegations he had taken responsibility for his actions and saved the College the time and expense of a contested hearing . The Committee accepted this submission and agreed with the awarding to the College of the cost for a single hearing day at the tariff rate of $ 4,460 ( albeit a portion of the true costs incurred ).
In summary , the Committee ordered : a fourmonth suspension , terms , conditions and limitations on Dr . Esmond ’ s certificate of registration , including a requirement that Dr . Esmond complete courses in professional boundaries and ethics as well as medical record keeping , a public reprimand and costs to the College for a single hearing day at the rate of $ 4,460 .
Order For complete details of the Order , please see the full decision at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Doctor Search and enter the Doctor ’ s Name .
At the conclusion of the hearing , Dr . Esmond waived his right to an appeal and the Committee administered the public reprimand .
DR . MARY ELIZABETH MCINTYRE
Practice Location : Chatham Area of Practice : General Practice
Hearing Information : Agreed Statement of Facts ; Admission to Some Allegations ; Contested Hearing
On July 6 , 2015 , the Discipline Committee found that Dr . McIntyre committed acts of professional misconduct in that she engaged in the sexual abuse of a patient ; she failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession ; and she engaged in conduct or an act or omission relevant to the practice of medicine that , having regard to all the circumstances , would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful , dishonourable or unprofessional . Dr . McIntyre admitted the allegations , except for the allegation of sexual abuse of a patient , Ms Y , and the allegation of disgraceful , dishonourable or unprofessional conduct in relation to Ms Y . Dr . McIntyre is a general practitioner who practised at all material times as a sole practitioner . The allegations arose from six public complaints received regarding her conduct , as well as a Registrar ’ s investigation into her practice .
Public Complaints In relation to the six public complaints , the Committee found that Dr . McIntyre failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession , and engaged in disgraceful ,
Full decisions are available online at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor ’ s name .
Issue 4 , 2016 Dialogue 69