Dialogue Volume 13 Issue 2 2017 - Page 63

discipline summaries sician Health Program and the College were satisfied that she could return to work. As part of that under- taking, Dr. Marcin voluntarily resigned her prescrib- ing privileges in relation to narcotic drugs, narcotic preparations, controlled drugs, benzodiazepines/ other targeted drugs. Dr. Marcin’s breached her March 26, 2014, under- taking and contravened the terms, conditions and limitations on her certificate of registration by pre- scribing narcotics and other monitored drugs when she was expressly prohibited from doing so. On December 17, 2014, Dr. Marcin entered into an undertaking which required, among other things, that she practise under the guidance of a clinical supervisor acceptable to the College. Dr. Marcin breached her December 17, 2014, undertaking by not meeting with her supervisor with the required frequency and for the required duration. She failed to fulfil the terms of her monitoring and rehabilitation plan as required by her undertaking. Defence counsel submitted that Dr. Marcin made a good faith effort to comply with her undertaking. The Committee did not agree. While the Commit- tee believed that Dr. Marcin has made some effort to comply with the monitoring terms, it was clear from the totality of the record that she repeatedly failed to comply. The Committee recognized that illness and other unexpected situations may impact on compli- ance. However, the excuse that Dr. Marcin offered – that she was unable to pay her supervisor – is not acceptable. The College monitor repeatedly reminded Dr. Marcin of the terms of her undertaking through- out the monitoring. The undertakings at issue were clear. The Commit- tee found the disregard Dr. Marcin demonstrated was purposeful, flagrant, and shows a disregard of her governing body. Reasons for Penalty The principles relevant to the imposition of penalty in disciplinary proceedings are well-established. The pro- tection of the public is the paramount consideration. Others include maintenance of public confidence in the reputation and integrity of the profession and in the principle of effective self-governance; general deterrence as it applies to the membership as a whole; specific deterrence as it applies to the member; and the potential for the member’s rehabilitation. In this matter, dishonesty, lack of personal integ- rity, incompetence and ungovernability all play a central role. The Committee was staggered by the breadth of professional misconduct which demon- strated Dr. Marcin’s blatant disregard of the health- care system, the responsibilities of the medical profession and its governance. The profound effect of such behaviour cannot be underestimated. There is simply no place in the medical profession for such reprehensible conduct. Dr. Marcin demonstrated repeated and pervasive dishonesty. Her fraudulent billing of OHIP for which she was criminally prosecuted, resulted in fewer dollars available for the care and treatment of Ontario patients in need. The College and the public rely upon and expect physicians to be honest in their OHIP billing. Serious consequences must follow when dishonesty occurs. Dr. Marcin demonstrated flagrant self-interest as well as dishonesty when she placed a letter terminat- ing her professional relationship with Patient A in his medical record. This falsification of her patient’s medical record was uncovered in a forensic audit and is a further illustration of self-interest and deception. Dr. Marcin placed her patients in a dangerous position when she failed to maintain the standard of practice and was incompetent in her prescribing of narcotics. She put the community at risk for drug abuse and drug diversion which is acknowledged to be a significant problem. Dr. Marcin demonstrated a lack of propriety and a disregard of her professional responsibility in her boundary violations with Patient A. In doing so, she abused the trust inherent in the physician-patient relationship. Dr. Marcin demonstrated an unacceptable disre- gard of the role of the College in the governance of the profession by repeated breaches of undertakings she made to the College. These undertakings were made to protect the public from harm. Dr. Marcin’s major errors in clinical judgment and her lack of insight as to he "gVFVF&fW76gVFV662&Rf&RƖRBwwr7666VV7BF7F"6V&6BVFW"FRF7F.( 2Rग77VR"#rFwVPc0