DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES
At the conclusion of the hearing, Dr. Irwin waived his
right to an appeal and the Committee administered the
reprimand.
DR. MELVYN LAWRENCE ISCOVE
PRACTICE LOCATION: Toronto
AREA OF PRACTICE: Psychiatry
HEARING INFORMATION: Allegations Denied; Contested
Hearing (Nine Hearing Days)
On March 8, 2018, the Discipline Committee found
that Dr. Iscove committed an act of professional
misconduct, in that he engaged in sexual abuse of
patients, and in that he engaged in an act or omis-
sion relevant to the practice of medicine that, having
regard to all of the circumstances, would reasonably
be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonorable,
or unprofessional.
Dr. Iscove has a special interest in the treatment of
patients with problems related to homosexuality, to
which he applies the theories of Dr. Edmund Bergler.
These theories treat homosexuality as a condition
dating to infancy, which is amenable to therapy. Al-
though Dr. Bergler’s theories and Dr. Iscove’s use of
these theories in his practice are controversial, there
was no allegation in this case that Dr. Iscove failed to
maintain the standard of practice of the profession,
and the Committee’s findings in this case are not re-
lated to any views that the members of the Commit-
tee may have with respect to Dr. Bergler’s teachings.
PATIENT A
Patient A first became a patient of Dr. Iscove when
he was in his early twenties and continued to see
Dr. Iscove as a patient for about 18 years. He was
referred to Dr. Iscove by a psychologist to whom he
had presented with depression and anxiety associated
with fears that he was gay. From the outset of treat-
ment, he was introduced by Dr. Iscove to the con-
cepts of Dr. Edmund Bergler. Patient A understood
that homosexuality, according to Dr. Bergler, was a
clinically curable condition through psychoanalytic
treatment, with excellent chances of cure.
At almost every appointment, there were discussions
about Patient A’s dreams and fantasies, including any
fantasies that he might have had about Dr. Iscove.
Even if Patient A did not spontaneously refer to fan-
tasies about Dr. Iscove, Dr. Iscove would ask directly
about fantasies specifically involving Dr. Iscove.
On a date between the end of 2001 and the beginning
of 2002, Dr. Iscove offered Patient A a hug at the end of
an appointment. Patient A accepted and they embraced.
The sexual activity progressed to Dr. Iscove removing
his penis from his trousers, then Patient A doing the
same. This progressed on later occasions to mutual mas-
turbation and oral sex. Patient A estimated that such
activity occurred on between 10 and 20 occasions with
oral sex occurring on one-third of the episodes.
A number of interactions between Patient A and
Dr. Iscove extended beyond the conventional physi-
cian-patient psycho-therapeutic relationship.
The Committee found that Dr. Iscove engaged in
conduct that would reasonably be regarded by mem-
bers of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable
or unprofessional in that he:
- tried to sell Patient A personal items;
- invited Patient A to attend the opera as his guest;
- arranged for him to rent the Bergler Foundation’s
apartment in another city.
PATIENT B
Patient B became a patient of Dr. Iscove in his late
teenage years and saw Dr. Iscove as a patient for over
20 years. His parents had recommended that he see
Dr. Iscove for his feelings of depression and anxiety.
Patient B denied having any concerns about his own
sexuality before seeing Dr. Iscove.
Throughout his therapy with Dr. Iscove, Patient B
was encouraged to read material by Dr. Bergler and
was aware that this was the basis for his treatment by
Dr. Iscove. According to Patient B, Dr. Iscove raised
the issue of Patient B’s feelings about homosexuality
at every appointment, even though he did not think
of himself as gay and had no physical relationships
with other men.
Dr. Iscove would ask at almost every appointment
whether Patient B was having fantasies about Dr. Iscove
himself. Patient B replied that he did have fantasies
ISSUE 4, 2018 DIALOGUE
63