discipline summaries
DR. ALAN ROSS LAING
Practice Location: Toronto
Practice Area: General Practice (Psychotherapy)
Hearing Information: Agreed Statement of Facts and
Admission, Agreed Statement of Facts Regarding Penalty, Joint Submission on Penalty
On September 4, 2013, the Discipline Committee
found that Dr. Alan Laing committed an act of professional misconduct, in that he failed to maintain the
standard of practice of the profession. Dr. Laing admitted to the allegation.
Dr. Laing is a general practitioner, who practised psychotherapy exclusively at all material times, to individuals, families and groups, including at a rural retreat. Dr.
Laing failed to maintain the standard of practice with
respect to 25 patients, and exposed his patients to risk
of harm, based on various deficiencies in his psychotherapy practice, including substandard record keeping,
substandard care and boundary violations. The deficiencies in Dr. Laing’s practice in these areas were set out in
the reports of two experts.
Dr. Laing’s failure to maintain the standard of practice with respect to record-keeping included but was
not limited to: failure to record start and stop times of
therapy, failure to record progress notes, and lack of
clear diagnoses. Dr. Laing delegated record-keeping in
his group therapy sessions to patients, breaching the
College’s policy concerning Delegation of Controlled
Acts and exposing the ‘scribing’ patients to harm by
placing them in a dual role. All of his billings were
under a single diagnostic billing code.
Dr. Laing’s failure to maintain the standard of practice
with respect to care included but was not limited to:
failing to formulate and record psychiatric diagnoses or
treatment plans, failing to consistently monitor patients’
mental status, and failing to identify patients who may
have had recognized diagnoses, exposing these patients
to potential harm or injury. Dr. Laing worked closely
with an unlicensed practitioner who had his certificate
of registration revoked by the College for sexual abuse.
Dr. Laing’s boundary violations included but were not
limited to therapeutically inappropriate violations of patients’ physical boundaries, including hugging patients,
encouraging patients to sit in his lap during therapy,
and encouraging a patient to permit him to straddle her
Full decisions are available online at www.cpso.on.ca.
Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor’s name.
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.
Issue 4, 2014 Dialogue
73