discipline summaries noncompliance will be sanctioned. All members of the profession should be aware that applications for annual renewal of a member’ s certificate of registration with the College, require complete and accurate reporting of offences, findings and settlements as well as any disciplinary action in other jurisdictions during the preceding year. Public institutions such as hospitals and universities have similar requirements which physicians must comply with. Physicians seeking hospital or university appointments or renewal of their privileges are required to report fully and accurately complaints, investigations, findings, restrictions and legal actions against them in the preceding year. Different institutions may have slightly different reporting obligations in the information they require. Dr. Varenbut failed in meeting this reporting requirement not once, but multiple times over several years, with multiple hospitals and the university where he taught. This failure is intolerable, even if inadvertent as submitted by his counsel. To disregard one’ s professional obligations through a lack of diligence and to mislead public institutions are serious matters. A three-month suspension is a significant penalty, within the range established by previous decisions of this Committee. A public reprimand is also a significant penalty. They demonstrate to Dr. Varenbut, and to the profession and the public, that professional misconduct of this sort cannot and will not be tolerated. Counsel submitted that Dr. Varenbut cooperated fully with the College’ s investigation. By admitting to the allegation, he avoided a lengthy contested hearing and spared witnesses having to testify. In the circumstances, limiting the award of costs to the College to the tariff amount for a single day($ 4,460), although representing a fraction of the true costs incurred, was accepted as appropriate by the Committee. In summary, the Committee directed that Dr. Varenbut’ s certificate of registration be suspended for three months, that he receive a reprimand, and pay costs in the amount of $ 4,460.
Full decisions are available online at www. cpso. on. ca. Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor’ s name.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Dr. Varenbut waived his right to an appeal and the Committee administered the public reprimand.
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.
Dr. LMN
On July 26, 2016, the Discipline Committee found that the allegation that Dr. LMN committed an act of professional misconduct in that he engaged in sexual abuse of a patient was not proven. The Committee also found that the allegation that Dr. LMN 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 was not proven. The allegations of professional misconduct in this case arose from Dr. LMN’ s alleged behaviour during Ms. A’ s April 2014 office visit, her third visit to his office. Ms. A alleged that Dr. LMN, a dermatologist, touched her breasts in a sexual manner at the office visit and failed to provide privacy to her during that same visit. Dr. LMN testified that he had no independent recollection of Ms. A. During his testimony, he relied on his handwritten and typed clinical notes. He also referred to his usual practice when he sees patients in consultation.
Allegation 1 Ms. A testified that, at end of the third visit, she stood on the stool while Dr. LMN examined her legs. She testified that, when she sat down on the examination table afterward, he suddenly put both his hands down her bra and cupped her breasts. Ms. A demonstrated how Dr. LMN extended both his hands backwards at the wrists, rotated his arms and hands so that the fingers were pointing down-
Issue 1, 2017 Dialogue 73