DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES
Mitigating and Aggravating Factors The Committee found there to be no meaningful mitigating factors . While not an aggravating factor , Dr . Porter ’ s lack of remorse and insight disentitled him to leniency in the imposition of a penalty . The most obvious aggravating factor was that Dr . Porter had appeared three times before the Discipline Committee . Dr . Porter had a history of repeated and escalating serious professional misconduct . The Committee was of the view that revocation was clearly within the range of acceptable penalties as seen in previous cases , in particular when there had been sexual abuse and breach of trust .
ORDER In summary , the Discipline Committee ordered revocation of Dr . Porter ’ s certificate of registration effective immediately ; a public reprimand ; payment of costs to the College in the amount of $ 36,200 ; and an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $ 16,060 , or other security acceptable to the College . 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 .
The Committee administered a reprimand in Dr . Porter ’ s absence .
DR . MEDHAT NADER RAMZY
PRACTICE LOCATION : Scarborough AREA OF PRACTICE : Family Medicine ( Walk-in Clinic )
HEARING INFORMATION : Agreed Statement of Facts , Admission , Joint Submission on Penalty
On August 9 , 2016 , the Discipline Committee found that Dr . Ramzy committed an act of professional misconduct , in that he has engaged in 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 .
Doctor-Patient Relationship Ms . A was treated by Dr . Ramzy at Pro Care Medical Clinic from June 2007 until June 2011 . In June 2011 , she decided she did not want to be treated by Dr . Ramzy anymore and the doctor-patient relationship was terminated . Ms . A ’ s spouse , Mr . B , was Dr . Ramzy ’ s patient until Mr . B ’ s death in 2011 .
Subsequent Relationship In July 2012 , over a year after the termination of the doctor-patient relationship , Ms . A attended the clinic with her teenage son , C , for his annual physical examination . This was C ’ s only appointment with Dr . Ramzy . During C ’ s appointment , Ms . A learned from Dr . Ramzy that he was single . After the examination , Dr . Ramzy left C in the examination room and went to his personal office to complete C ’ s paperwork . Ms . A also went to Dr . Ramzy ’ s office , and arrangements were made for Ms . A and Dr . Ramzy to go out socially that night .
That evening , Ms . A and Dr . Ramzy ate dinner at a restaurant and then went back to Dr . Ramzy ’ s home , where they engaged in sexual intercourse . A sexual relationship between Ms . A and Dr . Ramzy followed , which commenced in July 2012 and ended in August 2012 . After this time , Dr . Ramzy and Ms . A no longer engaged in sexual relations . After Dr . Ramzy ended their social relationship , Ms . A threatened Dr . Ramzy that she would complain to the College about Dr . Ramzy ’ s care of her late husband . On August 15 , 2012 , Ms . A wrote to Dr . Ramzy that he “ will pay the price for your irresponsible behaviour .” On August 26 , 2012 , Ms . A wrote that she was “ starting to file a complain [ sic ] about your reckless behaviour on my late husband case .” Ms . A also referenced filing the complaint about her late husband in her email of September 1 , 2012 . On a date in October 2012 , Ms . A attended at the Pro Care Medical Clinic , seeking treatment for shortness of breath and an irregular heartbeat . The cardiologist at the clinic required a referral to see Ms . A . Dr . Ramzy was the only family physician at the clinic at that time and agreed , because of the apparent urgency , to see Ms . A on that day . Dr . Ramzy ’ s entry in Ms . A ’ s chart indicates that she attended to manage her chest pain . She requested a flu shot , a
64
DIALOGUE ISSUE 3 , 2017