Dialogue Volume 13 Issue 3 2017 - Page 75

DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES five months to be remitted on terms and conditions related to compliance with his bankruptcy proposal and the individual counselling and educational ses- sions related to ethics and boundary issues referred to above. He further proposed that the remaining two months of his suspension, after the five months had been remitted, not be served consecutively: one month would be served within 90 days from the date the penalty order was made, and one month would be served during the first half of 2017. The Committee was mindful of the principles relevant to the imposition of penalty in discipline hearings. The protection of the public, particularly of current and future patients of the practitioner, is of paramount consideration. Other relevant principles include: maintenance of public confidence in the ability of the profession to govern its members and in the reputation and integrity of the profession; general deterrence to all members of the profession; specific deterrence to the member; and the potential for reha- bilitation of the member. Aggravating and mitigating factors, if any, pertaining to the events in question should also be considered. As a mitigating factor, the Committee recognized Dr. Virani’s cooperation with the College in this matter. The Committee also noted Dr. Virani’s previ- ous discipline history, but because it was related to a clinical care issue, the Committee did not view this as a significant aggravating factor. The Committee concluded that the appropriate sanction in this matter is an eight-month suspension, a requirement that Dr. Virani successfully complete an ethics course, a reprimand, and costs of a one day hearing. he argued to the Court, in an appeal heard on June 5, 2017, that the eight-month suspension was too high and out of proportion with prior penalty orders of the Discipline Committee in similar cases. On July 27, 2017, the Divisional Court released its decision in the above-noted matter, dismissing the physician’s appeal and upholding the order made by the Discipline Committee. The Court noted that the eight-month suspension was reasonable on the facts of this case. Full decisions are available online at www.cpso.on.ca. Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor’s name. ORDER In summary, the Committee ordered and directed an eight-month suspension; the completion of an ethics course; a public reprimand; and payment of costs for a one-day hearing in the amount of $5,000. For complete details of the Order, please see the full decision at www.cpso.on.ca. Select Doctor Search and enter the Doctor’s Name. APPEAL Dr. Virani appealed the penalty decision of the Dis- cipline Committee to Divisional Court. In particular, ISSUE 3, 2017 DIALOGUE 75