The following are brief summaries of formal actions taken against members. Where possible, a redacted copy of the formal order is attached. In many cases, more specific information may be available from the College office.
Investigation by Vitalité Health Network found that this Radiation Oncologist had improperly accessed medical records of 140 individuals, including co-workers and others. There was no clinical reason for doing so. As a result, the Regional Health Authority imposed a suspension of six months duration. With the agreement of the physician, Council of the College determined to accept this period of suspension as the appropriate penalty for this professional misconduct.
A family complained that this family physician failed to provide adequate care for their late father. The patient had been attending Dr. Lam for two years with a diagnosis of migraines. No examination, assessment, or other inquires on the patient’s general health were made. There was evidence of ongoing health issues to which the patient eventually succumbed. Following an investigation of the complaint, Dr. Lam agreed to plead guilty to a charge of professional misconduct, specifically failing to meet the standard of the profession.
He waived his right to a hearing and was given a reprimand and served a three month suspension, following which he returned to practise with restrictions and under supervision.
This psychiatrist had had his licence revoked by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Newfoundland and Labrador after a finding of professional misconduct in relation to sexual abuse of a patient. The psychiatrist also had a New Brunswick licence, on which basis he was providing treatment for military personnel in New Brunswick. A finding of misconduct in one jurisdiction can be sufficient for a similar finding in New Brunswick. As a consequence, Dr. Hanley pled guilty to a charge of professional misconduct here, but sought permission to continue a limited practice with the military. Such was accepted by a Board of Inquiry, but this was subsequently rejected by Council and his licence to practise medicine in New Brunswick revoked.
In 1993, it became known that this surgeon had abandoned his practice in Edmundston without leaving provision for his patients or providing security for his records. As a consequence, the College pursued a Court action to seize the records for safe keeping. In addition, for a period of time, efforts and expense were made to locate Dr. Jain. After some time, he agreed to plead guilty to a charge of professional misconduct in relationship to abandonment of his patients. As a result of such, Council issued a reprimand and accepted compensation for the College's costs in the matter, in the amount of $1,800.
There were complaints that the physician had declined to accept patients based on their age. He was found guilty by a Board of Inquiry of professional misconduct in improperly discriminating in access to his practice. He was issued a reprimand without publication of his name. He was also ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings, which were subsequently agreed to at $37,500.
This physician had plead guilty to a charge of possession of child pornography. In the opinion of Council, this activity was inconsistent with the proper professional behaviour of a physician and, as a consequence, based on authority under the Medical Act, Council revoked his license to practise in New Brunswick.
There was a complaint that a physician had written a prescription for a patient not seen. The prescription was then filled by a third party and sent to another country where the medication was not easily available. The physician involved plead guilty to a charge of professional misconduct for misuse of the authority to prescribe and received a penalty of an unpublished reprimand.
Following the death of a twenty-year old patient from an overdose, the physician plead guilty to a charge of professional misconduct regarding his prescribing practices, relinquished his right to prescribe certain narcotics, and received an unpublished reprimand.
A physician was to perform two procedures on two different patients. The procedures were somewhat similar, and the patients were of a similar age. He relied on his own “booking” list to determine which patient was to have which procedure. Unfortunately, his own list had the patients in the wrong order. The first patient, thus, had the wrong procedure. The matter was relatively easily corrected, although the patient had to be anaesthetized a second time. There was no evidence of any long-term effect. The physician acknowledged the error and made specific changes in his procedures. To a charge of performing a procedure without consent, he admitted professional misconduct. In an agreement with the Council, he was issued a reprimand without publication of his name.
This physician was found guilty of professional misconduct by the Professional Conduct Committee of the General Medical Council of the United Kingdom. This finding was on the basis of four complaints of sexual abuse arising from patients in New Brunswick.
As a result of this finding, the General Medical Council revoked Dr. Akuffo-Akoto license and struck him from the Register.
Having been found guilty of professional misconduct in another jurisdiction, the Council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick also found Dr. Akuffo-Akoto guilty of professional misconduct, revoked his license, and struck his name from the Registers.
During the course of a complaint investigation, this physician entered an agreement with the College to restrict certain aspects of his practice. He confirmed this agreement in writing on three occasions.
However, he subsequently advised of his intention to continue practice without restriction, and on doing so, was charged with professional misconduct for breaching an agreement with the College with respect to his practice.
Having been subsequently found guilty of professional misconduct by a Board of Inquiry, this physician was ordered by Council to be subject to a reprimand, without publication of his name, that his licence be formally restricted as previously agreed, and as well that he pay the costs of the matter.
There was a complaint that a physician had improperly left his practice without notifying his patients, nor making any advance arrangements for alternate care. The physician subsquently plead guilty to a charge of abandonment. Council imposed the penalty of a reprimand, without publication of the physician’s name.
This physician was the subject of six complaints.
One complainant alleged that she had developed a sexual relationship with him during the course of his treatment of her, and subsequently. As a result, she had a child. She further alleges she was required to promise not to file any formal complaint, as a condition for financial support.
A second complainant alleged that she had had sexual intercourse with this physician on two occasions.
There was a complaint from an individual, then a student nurse, that this physician had inappropriately made sexual advances toward her.
There were complaints from three other patients who alleged that, during the course of their treatment, they were touched in an inappropriate manner.
An agreement was reached between the College and Dr. Arditti as follows:
- Without admitting the specifics of any charge, Dr. Arditti acknowledged that professional misconduct had occurred.
- Dr. Arditti’s license to practise would be suspended for a period of one year.
- Dr. Arditti would agree to relinquish his license permanently and to not seek licensure again in New Brunswick, nor in any other jurisdiction.
As a result of complaints to the College, a physician pled guilty to three counts of professional misconduct involving the misuse of the authority to prescribe. A summary of the errors which were acknowledged follows:
i. The issue of five similar prescriptions to a single patient on a single visit in order that the patient could obtain a large supply of benzodiazepines as she was leaving the province and would lose her coverage for prescriptions.
ii. The inappropriate prescribing of Ritalin and Talwin in combination. This combination of drugs is frequently abused or trafficked.
iii. Inappropriate prescribing of benzodiazepines and codeine-containing compounds, including:
- excessive prescribing of short-acting benzodiazepines, specifically triazolam and oxazepam;
- prescribing of triazolam and oxazepam concommittally;
- incidents of excessive daily consumption which should have suggested the possibility of trafficking;
- inappropriate duration of prescriptions and inappropriate number of refills;
- excessive prescribing of Fiorinal C;
- inappropriate concommittant prescribing of two codeine-containing compounds;
- excessive daily dosages of codeine, such as should have suggested the likelihood of trafficking.
As the result of an agreement with the College, the physician pled guilty to three charges regarding the above described activity. A reprimand was imposed. He relinquished certain narcotic prescribing privileges, and agreed to pay costs to the College in the amount of $7500.
Council received the report of the Board of Inquiry wherein a physician was charged with three counts of sexual impropriety and three counts of unprofessional conduct. He was found guilty on one count of unprofessional conduct for inappropriately touching the patient in a manner which the Board described as "patronizing, insensitive, and unprofessional".
After reviewing the findings of the Board, and its recommendation on penalty, and hearing from the physician and his legal counsel, Council ordered that the penalty should be a reprimand without publication. Council also made an order for costs in the amount of $6,000, related to the portion of the prosecution which had resulted in the guilty finding.
This anaesthetist had been convicted of assault of a patient in January 1993. Under an agreement with the physician, it was the order of Council that his license to practise medicine be suspended and that such suspension would be deemed to be served from April 15, 1992 to July 15, 1992. It is noted that during this period of time this physician had his hospital privileges suspended and was not otherwise practising.
This physician was charged with improperly obtaining medical records on a patient he was no longer caring for. A Board of Inquiry found that in response to a civil suit, Dr. Hasan had obtained mental health records for a purpose unrelated to the treatment of a patient at the time when the patient was not in his care, and thereby engaged in a conduct relevant to the practice of medicine that having regard to all the circumstances would be reasonably regarded by Council as disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional.
The Board of Inquiry found the physician guilty of the above charge and made a recommendation on penalty.
At a hearing to consider the penalty, Council heard evidence in support of Dr. Hasan and ordered the following:
- A suspension of his license to practise medicine for a period of 4 months.
- That he submit to an independent psychiatric assessment by an examiner appointed by the College.
- That the completion of such an assessment be a condition of return to practice.
- That he pay the costs of the College. These were subsequently determined to be $29,000.
This physician had plead guilty to a charge of criminal fraud relating to improper billing of Medicare. She had been sentenced to 30 days in jail.
The physician further plead guilty to a charge of professional misconduct before the College. As a consequence of the guilty plea, the Council ordered that her license to practise medicine be suspended for a period of six months, but such sentence to be suspended until and if there is a further finding of professional misconduct within the next five years
This physician had been found guilty of professional misconduct by a Board of Inquiry constituted under the Medical Act. The charges included sexual impropriety and the committing of acts relevant to the practice of medicine that, having regard to all the circumstances would reasonably be regarded by Council as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional.
The Board of Inquiry made findings of guilt in response to 9 complainants. In the case of two of them, this involved a sexual relationship which extended over a number of years. The activity included both oral and vaginal intercourse in the physician's office or in the patient's home. One of these patients was an adolescent during this time.
Other patients alleged improper breast examination. The examinations were either unnecessary or included fondling, examination from behind, or oral contact with the breasts.
Complaints also concerned improper pelvic examinations including the use of an ungloved finger, attempts at manual stimulation, and examination with the patient standing when not medically indicated. Some of these patients were also adolescents at the time.
Other charges included improper conduct with hospital employees, including improper sexual remarks, kissing, and improper touching.
In totality, and after hearing evidence in support of the physician, Council ordered that the license to practise medicine of Floyd Duncan MacDonald be revoked and his name stricken from the Register.
Council also ordered that he pay the College's costs in the matter. After subsequent negotiations, these were set at $75,000.
This physician plead guilty before a Board of Inquiry to a charge of improper prescribing.
The physician admitted that he had written a prescription for a patient known by him to be an addict when the patient approached him while the physician was in his car. This was done without any examination or assessment of the patient's medical condition.
In response to a guilty plea, and on the recommendation of the Board of Inquiry, the Council ordered that the physician receive a reprimand not recorded on the Register. As a consequence, there is no publication of his name.
The physician plead guilty to a charge of sexual impropriety in relation to an ongoing relationship with a patient. As a consequence, Council imposed a suspension of one year, which was reduced to nine months on appeal.
This physician was found guilty of sexual impropriety in regards to have an improper sexual relationship with a patient. His license was suspended for a period of three months.