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