discipline summaries relevant to a physician ’ s suitability to practise than a finding , as in this case , that he has assaulted his patients in his office during the course of a medical examination . For these reasons , the Committee finds the allegation that Dr . Peirovy is guilty of offences relevant to his suitability to practise is proven .
Submissions for Penalty Counsel for the College submitted that Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration should be revoked . The College also sought an order that he be reprimanded , that he reimburse the College for funding for counselling provided to patients , that he post security to satisfy these obligations , and that he pay the costs of the hearing . Counsel for Dr . Peirovy submitted that revocation of Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration was not warranted . Defence counsel instead sought a composite penalty consisting of suspension of Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration for four months , a public reprimand , and conditions on Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration including that he continue to have his interactions with female patients supervised by a female chaperone for at least one year ; that he continue his work with Dr . D on issues of consent , boundaries , and doctor-patient communication ; that he have his technique of chest examination reviewed and assessed by a family physician selected by Dr . D ; and that he participate in individual psychotherapy as required . Dr . Peirovy also agreed with the College ’ s request that he reimburse the College for funding for patients ’ therapy and for the costs of the hearing .
Decision on Penalty The Committee found that revocation of Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration was not warranted . The Committee ordered that Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration be suspended for six months , that he appear before the Committee to be reprimanded , and that his certificate of registration be subject to a number of conditions .
The conditions on Dr . Peirovy ’ s certificate of registration are to include :
• not engaging in any professional encounters with female patients unless the patient encounter takes place in the presence of a monitor who is a female member of a regulated health profession ;
• posting signs in his practice visible to patients that state that he is only allowed to professionally engage with female patients in the presence of a practice monitor ;
• submitting to , and not interfering with , unannounced inspections of his practice locations and to inspections of patient charts by the College and to any other activity the College deems necessary , including simulated patients , in order to monitor Dr . Peirovy ’ s compliance with the terms of this Order ;
• continuing to undergo individualized instruction with Dr . D on issues of consent , the maintenance of boundaries , and doctor-patient communication ;
• participating in a clinical education program , directed by a supervisor acceptable to the College , regarding the issue of physical examination , with particular focus on issues of the sexual privacy of and sensitivity to female patients .
The Committee also directed that Dr . Peirovy reimburse the College for funding for patients therapy , pursuant to the program required under section 85.7 of the Code , and that he post an irrevocable letter of credit or other security acceptable to the College to guarantee payment , in the amount of $ 64,240 .
The Committee directed that Dr . Peirovy pay costs to the College in the amount of $ 35,680 .
Appeals On August 7 , 2015 , Dr . Peirovy appealed the decision on finding of the Discipline Committee to the Superior Court of Justice ( Divisional Court ). On May 24 , 2016 , the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario appealed the decision on penalty of the Discipline Committee to the Superior Court of Justice ( Divisional Court ). On June 27 , 2016 , Dr . Peirovy abandoned his appeal to the Superior Court of Justice ( Divisional Court ). On January 17 , 2017 , the Divisional Court granted the College ’ s appeal of the penalty decision , quashed the
Full decisions are available online at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor ’ s name .
Issue 1 , 2017 Dialogue 71