DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES
DR. CHRISTOPHER STEPHEN DOYLE
PRACTICE LOCATION: Mississauga
AREA OF PRACTICE: Psychiatrist
HEARING INFORMATION: Admission; Agreed Statement of
Facts; Contested Penalty
On February 1, 2018, the Discipline Committee
found that Dr. Doyle committed an act of profes-
sional misconduct, in that he failed to maintain the
standard of practice of the profession, and in that he
has engaged in conduct or an act or omission relevant
to the practice of medicine that, having regard to all
of the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded
by members as unprofessional. The Committee also
found that Dr. Doyle is incompetent.
Dr. Doyle is a psychiatrist who received his indepen-
dent practice certificate with the College in 2001. Dur-
ing the relevant period, Dr. Doyle worked at a hospital
and maintained a private practice in Mississauga.
PATIENT A
Patient A was referred to Dr. Doyle by her family
physician, Dr. X, in 2013. Together with his referring
letter, Dr. X provided Dr. Doyle with approximately
25 pages of medical records for Patient A. Within the
records provided to Dr. Doyle are two pages contain-
ing reference to Patient A’s previous sexual boundary
issues with a mental health professional while under
the professional’s care, and reference to Patient A
having developed an infatuation with a prior treating
psychiatrist.
Dr. Doyle was Patient A’s psychiatrist between Octo-
ber 2013 and July 2014, during which time he focused
on Patient A’s medications. By December of 2013, Dr.
Doyle’s diagnosed Patient A as “a borderline woman
with increased anger and increased depression.”
During the time she was Dr. Doyle’s patient,
Patient A perceived that Dr. Doyle’s demeanour
towards her changed, in that he became increasingly
casual during her appointments, including sitting
back with his feet up on the coffee table and using
profanities in front of Patient A. He also discussed
his interest in cycling with her.
Patient A said that she began to feel that Dr. Doyle
wanted to foster a friendship or relationship with
her. In July 2014, Patient A told Dr. Doyle about
her feelings for him. Dr. Doyle indicated that he
was flattered but that her feelings were not appropri-
ate for the physician-patient relationship. Patient A
perceived that Dr. Doyle was extremely uncomfort-
able by her disclosure. He stopped the session and
asked Patient A to see his secretary to make a subse-
quent appointment, while in the past, Dr. Doyle had
scheduled all subsequent sessions himself on his cell
phone at the end of Patient A’s appointments. Patient
A booked a follow-up appointment for August 2014
with Dr. Doyle through the secretary and left the ses-
sion feeling confused, ashamed and humiliated.
The following day, Patient A sent Dr. Doyle an
email apologizing and seeking clarity as to what had
transpired in her appointment. Dr. Doyle responded
explaining that he could no longer see Patient A and
while her feelings are understandable, they are not
appropriate for their relationship.
Further to the email exchange, which Patient A
perceived as notice of termination, Patient A had
no contact with Dr. Doyle. She did not attend the
subsequent appointment that she had booked with
Dr. Doyle.
Patient A described the emotional impact of Dr.
Doyle’s response to her disclosure and the termina-
tion of her care as “devastating.” She went to see her
family physician in July 2014, reporting suicidal
thoughts and self-blame as a result of this interac-
tion with Dr. Doyle. She went to the hospital with
a suicide plan several days later and was voluntarily
admitted to a hospital for several days.
Patient A submitted a complaint to the College in
July 2014.
Dr. Doyle stated that he waited for Patient A dur-
ing her scheduled appointment in August 2014, at
which point he planned to properly terminate the
patient-physician relationship. Dr. Doyle did not
take any action in respect to the transfer of care for
Patient A, he did not send a termination letter to Pa-
tient A and did not communicate with the referring
physician about the end of the therapeutic relation-
ship. He did not make arrangements for the prescrip-
tion of Patient A’s medications, nor did he assist in
finding another psychiatrist for Patient A.
ISSUE 4, 2018 DIALOGUE
57