Dialogue Volume 15 Issue 1 2019 - Page 49

DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional. Dr. Gordon, a neurologist specializing in the evalu- ation and treatment of widespread pain, neuropathic pain and pelvic and genital pain, had an appointment with Patient A, in March 2016. Patient A’s main con- cern at the appointment was pain in her feet. After reviewing Patient A’s chart, Dr. Gordon in- dicated he wanted to do an examination. He did not offer or provide Patient A with a chaperone for the examination. During the examination, Dr. Gordon used a cotton swab to test parts of Patient A’s body, beginning with her arms, legs and feet. Without ask- ing and without an adequate explanation to Patient A, he slightly exposed Patient A’s breast and touched it with the swab. Dr. Gordon then asked Patient A to stand and face the wall. Without asking and without an adequate explanation to Patient A, he pulled up the back of her hospital gown to expose her buttocks and touched parts of her buttocks with the swab. Dr. Gordon then asked Patient A to lie down on the bed to check for vulvar pain. Patient A has a history of sexual abuse and attempted to avoid the exam by telling Dr. Gordon she was menstruating. Dr. Gordon said he was fine to proceed and Patient A complied. Dr. Gordon did not explain to Patient A why he wanted to examine her vagina or what he was about to do. Without an explanation adequate for Patient A, Dr. Gordon used the cotton swab to lightly touch parts of Patient A’s labia, including her internal labia. The experience left Patient A feeling caught off guard and very upset. An expert retained by the College opined that the physical examination conducted with a cotton swab was appropriate to test for allodynia. However, the ex- pert opined that in obtaining consent for examination of breasts, buttocks or pelvic areas, a physician should be attuned to ongoing consent. The fact that the patient did not understand what examination was go- ing to be performed and why it was being performed implied a serious breakdown in communication. Undertaking On January 26, 2018, the Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee made an interim order directing the Registrar to suspend Dr. Gordon’s certificate of registration. Dr. Gordon has not practised since that Order took effect. Dr. Gordon has undertaken to resign his certificate of registration effective immedi- ately and not to apply or re-apply for registration as a physician to practise medicine in Ontario or any other jurisdiction. ORDER In light of Dr. Gordon’s undertaking to resign and to not re-apply, the Committee ordered and directed that Dr. Gordon attend before the panel to be rep- rimanded and that Dr. Gordon pay hearing costs to the College in the amount of $6,000. For complete details, 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. Gordon waived his right to an appeal and the Committee administered the public reprimand. DR. EMAD SAMIR LUKA GUIRGUIS PRACTICE LOCATION: Mississauga/Oakville AREA OF PRACTICE: Family Medicine HEARING INFORMATION: Plea of No Contest; State- ment of Uncontested Facts; Contested Penalty On Januray 18, 2018, the Discipline Committee found that Dr. Guirguis committed an act of profes- sional misconduct, in that he has engaged in an act or omission relevant to the practice of medicine that having regard to all the circumstances would reason- ably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishon- ourable, or unprofessional. Incapacity Investigation In May 2014, the College received information from a pharmacist and from a physician that Dr. Guirguis had been forging prescriptions for Percocet for him- self using the College registration number and signa- ture of a colleague with whom he shared an office.  In the context of an investigation into his capacity, Dr. Guirguis admitted his self-prescribing and admitted that he had written prescriptions to himself under another physician’s name.   The capacity assessment did not conclude that ISSUE 1, 2019 DIALOGUE 49