What does this mean ?
DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES to the University . In his response to the College investigation , Dr . Adams confirmed that the student is , in fact , his family member and confirmed that he had written the five medical notes provided to the College by the University . He also confirmed that had provided medical care to his family member . According to Dr . Adams ’ family member ’ s patient charts dating from April 2010 to December 2013 and from April to July 2016 , Dr . Adams provided medical treatment for his family member . In addition , he has provided and billed OHIP for treatment for his family member on two occasions in May and July 2016 . In his response to the College regarding the OHIP billings , Dr . Adams acknowledged that he ought not to have billed OHIP . Dr . Adams has repaid OHIP for this improper billing . The care that Dr . Adams provided to his family member violates professional boundaries and is contrary to professional obligations articulated in College policy , which prohibits physicians from providing treatment for themselves or family members except :
i ) for a minor condition or in an emergency situation , and ii ) when another qualified health-care professional is not readily available . These conditions were not present when Dr . Adams
What does this mean ?
We provide definitions for the legal terminology used in the discipline process
Admission The physician admits that the facts alleged amount to professional misconduct and / or incompetence .
Plea of No Contest The physician does not contest the facts . The College files a statement of facts as an exhibit at the hearing . The Discipline Committee can accept the facts as correct and make a finding of professional misconduct and / or incompetence . The physician does not admit to the facts or findings for the purpose of any other proceeding .
Agreed Statement of Facts A statement of facts that are negotiated and agreed to by the College and the physician . It is filed as an exhibit at the hearing .
Joint Submission on Penalty A penalty that is proposed to the Committee as an appropriate penalty by both the College and the physician . In law , the Discipline Committee must accept a joint submission on penalty unless it would be contrary to the public interest and bring the administration of justice into disrepute .
Contested Hearing The physician denies the allegations . The College must prove the allegations on a balance of probabilities ( the civil standard of proof ) by calling evidence such as witnesses . If one or more of the allegations is proved , a penalty hearing is scheduled . The College and the physician may agree and jointly propose a penalty to the Committee or they may disagree and a contested penalty hearing takes place .
Aggravating , Mitigating Circumstances Aggravating and mitigating circumstances may be considered by the Discipline Committee in determining an appropriate penalty . Mitigating and aggravating circumstances are considered by the Committee , so that the penalty imposed is proportionate to the gravity of the physician ’ s conduct , and the degree of responsibility of the physician . Mitigating circumstances tend to reduce penalties , whereas aggravating circumstances tend to increase penalties .
Aggravating circumstances could include : a high degree of vulnerability of the person ( s ) affected by the physician ’ s conduct ; a prior disciplinary history with the College ; and a lack of insight by the physician into his or her own misconduct .
Mitigating circumstances could include : a clean disciplinary record ; an admission to the facts underlying the allegations in advance of a hearing ; cooperating with the investigation ; a demonstration of remorse or regret about the effects of the misconduct on others ; taking remedial steps on the physician ’ s own initiative prior to a finding or an order by the College .
ISSUE 2 , 2018 DIALOGUE 55