DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES
A mitigating fact is that Dr . Di Paola admitted to her misconduct from the beginning of the hospital ’ s investigation . She fully cooperated with the College , and by accepting the joint submission , she spared witnesses the emotional distress of testifying and the College the time and cost of a contested hearing . Dr . Di Paola has repeatedly expressed remorse for her actions . She has written a letter of apology to both patients and to the hospital . Having considered all of the above factors , the Committee was satisfied that the proposed penalty in this case was appropriate . Requiring Dr . Di Paola to take a course in medical ethics , in addition to the two she has already taken on professional boundaries and privacy , helps towards her rehabilitation . The three-month suspension serves as a general deterrent to the profession , to remind all Ontario physicians of the obligation to respect the privacy and confidentiality of patient records and of the serious consequences that follow when that is not done . The penalty provides a specific deterrent to Dr . Di Paola against repetition of such misconduct . In accepting the joint submission on penalty , the Committee reassures the public that it can have confidence in the medical profession and the College ’ s ability to regulate the profession in the public interest .
ORDER The Discipline Committee directed that : Dr . Di Paola appear before the panel to be reprimanded ; the Registrar suspend Dr . Di Paola ’ s certificate of registration for a period of three months ; that Di Paola participate in and successfully complete five hours of individualized instruction in medical ethics with an instructor approved by the College ; and that Dr . Di Paola pay costs to the College in the amount of $ 5,000 . For complete details of the Order , please see the full decision at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Find a Doctor and enter the doctor ’ s name .
At the conclusion of the hearing , Dr . Di Paola waived her right to an appeal and the Committee administered the public reprimand .
DR . JACQUES HENRI DUBINS
PRACTICE LOCATION : Toronto AREA OF PRACTICE : General Practice ( Hypnotherapy )
HEARING INFORMATION : Agreed Statement of Facts , Admission , Joint Submission on Penalty
On August 29 , 2016 , the Discipline Committee found that Dr . Dubins committed an act of professional misconduct , in that he has failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession ; and he has engaged in an act or omission relevant to the practice of medicine that , having regard to all the circumstances , would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful , dishonourable or unprofessional . Dr . Dubins admitted the allegations . Dr . Dubins is a family physician with an interest in hypnotherapy . At the time of the hearing , he was 72 years of age . In March of 2013 , the College received a complaint about Dr . Dubins from Patient A , a patient who had attended Dr . Dubins twice in early 2013 for hypnotherapy for smoking cessation .
Patient A complained that : - Dr . Dubins ’ office was dirty ; - During the appointment , Dr . Dubins asked unnecessary and inappropriate questions of a sexual nature that made him feel uncomfortable , such as whether he is gay or straight and whether he is sexually active ; - During the hypnotherapy session Dr . Dubins used graphic and offensive sexual images that caused Patient A to be very uncomfortable ; and - During the session , Dr . Dubins told Patient A to unbutton his pants , lower his fly and lower his pants .
On March 18 , 2013 , College investigators attended at Dr . Dubins ’ office to inspect for cleanliness , where they found the following :
Full decisions are available online at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Doctor Search and enter the doctor ’ s name .
ISSUE 4 , 2017 DIALOGUE 71