Sexual abuse initiative
Sexual abuse and sexual assault are issues that are important to the College. They are also
issues of broad social concern. The College is committed to doing all it can to ensure patients are protected
from sexual abuse by physicians, and those who have experienced abuse are supported in coming forward to
report the abuse. The College cannot act alone. In order to address these issues properly and to prevent sexual
abuse and sexual assault from occurring in society, a collaborative approach is required. Participation from
government, regulatory colleges, the private sector, community support agencies, educational institutions;
and others is necessary.
RHPA
Provisions
Council, therefore, is recommending that the
Discipline Committee have the power to specify
a period between one and five years before a physician can apply for reinstatement following a revocation
for sexual abuse or other professional misconduct of a
sexual nature.
With respect to other possible enhancements to
strengthen the legislative scheme, Council has also
directed that the College ask government for the following changes:
Expand scope of mandatory revocation to include misconduct of a sexual nature that is not
sexual abuse
Council has directed that the College ask government
to expand mandatory revocation to also apply to convictions for specified criminal sexual offences, findings
of professional misconduct in other jurisdictions that
would trigger mandatory revocation in Ontario, and
sexual misconduct of any kind with a minor.
This would widen the scope of mandatory revocation
to include circumstances similar to – and as egregious as
– those in which it currently applies, but where it does
not apply because the conduct falls under a different
heading of professional misconduct.
It captures conduct that Council believes is seen as
reprehensible in the eyes of the public and is consistent
with the College’s commitment to zero tolerance.
Clarify the Discipline Committee’s authority to
require that mandatory revocation commence
immediately upon a finding rather than waiting
for a penalty hearing
The Discipline Committee’s practice has been that
after making a finding of professional misconduct, including one requiring mandatory revocation, a penalty
hearing is scheduled, at which counsel make submis-
22
Dialogue Issue 2, 2015
sions, following which a decision is released and
the penalty imposed. This can delay the automatic penalty of revocation for a period of months.
As part of an ongoing evaluation of our processes and
practices, College prosecutors will now request that following a finding of professional misconduct for which
the penalty of revocation is mandatory, the penalty
commence immediately upon the finding being made.
Any other aspect of the penalty that is discretionary
(such as costs, funding for patient therapy and counselling, etc.) will be determined later in accordance with
the Discipline Committee’s former practice.
The College will seek legislative change to clarify the
Discipline Committee’s power to impose immediate revocation following a finding of professional misconduct
for which revocation is mandatory.
Give the Discipline Committee power to specify a
minimum per