SA doctor banned for inappropriate relationship with client

A former Adelaide doctor has been banned from practising medicine in Australia for at least two years after a patient accused him of "grooming" her over a period of almost four years.

The South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (SACAT) handed down a judgement in May after the Medical Board of South Australia referred a complaint to it that the doctor had engaged in professional misconduct by engaging in a relationship with a patient.

The 59-year-old man was a registered medical practitioner in Australia for 14 years, from 2009 until his registration lapsed in December 2023.

The man moved overseas in 2024 and "currently has no plan to return to live in Australia".

The tribunal found that, although the man's relationship with his patient was not sexual in nature, it was still "inconsistent with professional standards" and made the patient feel "distressed, fearful, intimidated and unsafe".

"The Tribunal notes the impact statement of [the patient] tendered to the Tribunal by the applicant ... in which [she] expresses her view that the respondent 'spent years grooming' her and that 'over time, his behaviour towards [her] became increasingly inappropriate and manipulative',"

it stated.

"[The patient] says that there was a power imbalance between her and the respondent (beyond the usual power imbalance between doctor and patient) because she 'needed him to sign documentation required for [her] university progression'.

"The Tribunal accepts that [the patient] felt distressed, fearful, intimidated and unsafe, and felt that she could not remove herself from the situation with the respondent "safely or without consequence."

Not a 'one-off incident'

The tribunal also acknowledged that the former doctor benefited by prescribing medication in the woman's name for his own use, as well as having food delivered to his house.

It found that the relationship spanned almost four years between April 2018 and February 2022.

"The respondent received [a topical medication] AB Epiduo Gel from [the patient] on a number of occasions including in May 2020 for his use but which he had prescribed in her name," the judgement read.

"The respondent's conduct violating the professional boundaries between himself and [the woman] was far from a one-off incident and further the respondent benefited himself from his contact with [her] by (at least) acquiring medication for himself that had been prescribed for [the woman], and by receiving bread and discount vouchers from [her]."

The judgement also found that the pair's communication via WhatsApp was "flirty in content" and that the two would refer to each other as "love" and "babe" and would say "miss you".

It also found the pair caught up "outside the consultation setting" and would engage in "extended hugs".

Not a 'fit and proper person'

The judgement found that the former doctor had acknowledged his wrongdoing.

"While the respondent 'asked his legal representatives to convey his regret' … and has conceded that his behaviour was substantially below the standard reasonably expected of a registered medical practitioner of his level of training or experience, nothing has been put before the Tribunal to explain why he behaved in that way, or to show that he has reflected on why he behaved in that way and has taken steps to address it and to ensure that similar circumstances could not recur," it read.

"The lack of any evidence of reflection by the respondent on his behaviour is concerning.

"The Tribunal takes the view that a practitioner who is prepared to engage in persistent, long-term violation of professional boundaries with a patient, from which the practitioner himself gains a personal benefit, and on which there is no evidence that he has subsequently reflected in any meaningful way, is not a fit and proper person to hold registration in the medical profession, regardless of whether sexual relations occurred between the practitioner and patient.

"The Tribunal finds that the [man] has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct because his behaviour was unprofessional conduct."

SACAT barred the man from "applying for registration as a registered health practitioner" until he is granted a reinstatement order.

The tribunal also ruled that he cannot apply for a reinstatement order for two years.

He was also ordered to pay the legal costs of the Medical Board of Australia.