By MARTIN JOHNSON health reporter
Suspended Northland gynaecologist Dr Graham Parry, slated in a disciplinary ruling, must now wait to find out if he will be banned from practising medicine.
The Medical Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal found him guilty of disgraceful conduct in a professional respect over his treatment of Paihia resident Colleen Poutsma. She is dying of cervical cancer, which he initially failed to diagnose.
The charge is the most serious misconduct claim doctors can face.
Wednesday's verdict, released by the Poutsma family yesterday, opens the way for the tribunal to strike Dr Parry off the medical register.
It has called for lawyers' submissions within 14 days on penalties, which could also include a fine of up to $20,000 and supervision or other practising conditions.
In its four years, the tribunal has struck off only four doctors.
Mrs Poutsma told the Herald last night that she felt sad for Dr Parry.
"It's someone's life's work that's been taken away from him.
"I didn't set out to hurt him but I feel the tribunal has made ... the right decision.
"It's mainly because so many other women have been affected. It's obvious Mr Parry's work is just not up to standard. When lives are at risk, it's just not acceptable."
She was feeling tired but expected a blood transfusion, booked for today, would help.
Her husband, Jack, said Dr Parry should be struck off for three years and undertake retraining.
Dr Parry declined to comment, other than saying in a statement that he was disappointed at the ruling and thanking his patients, colleagues and friends for their support.
The tribunal's 55-page decision criticises Dr Parry's failure to examine Mrs Poutsma's cervix, "possibly the most basic investigation required of him as a specialist gynaecologist," when she was referred with abnormal bleeding in August 1997. He performed an abdominal ultrasound scan.
The omission was "grossly negligent" and "reckless."
"Dr Parry's failure to carry out an appropriate examination or any investigation of his patient's principal, and potentially ultimately fatal, symptom is indefensible and inexcusable."
The decision recalls the assertion, accepted by Dr Parry, of prosecution lawyer Matthew McClelland at the Waitangi hearing last month: "It's kid's stuff that an [obstetrician-gynaecologist], when presented with symptoms like Colleen's, does everything to exclude the possible causes of that, including cervical cancer."
The tribunal, comprising a lawyer, three doctors and a lay person, also found it "disturbing" that Dr Parry did not appear to understand that a visible cancer did not require further diagnostic biopsy (tissue removal).
He performed an unnecessary laser cone biopsy, which might have compromised later treatment, in January 1998, despite suspecting cancer on internal examination and receiving confirmation from a smaller biopsy in the preceding weeks.
He should have referred Mrs Poutsma to specialist cancer care but claimed that a cone biopsy was "normal practice" and was in this case supported by National Women's Hospital's head of cancer treatment, Dr John Whittaker, in a telephone call.
Dr Whittaker could not recall the alleged conversation and the tribunal ruled that it did not occur.
The tribunal found it could not establish, "to the requisite standard of proof," whether Dr Parry had deliberately tried to cover up his mismanagement of Mrs Poutsma's case.
But it was satisfied that Dr Parry had in letters deliberately misled Dr Whittaker and Mrs Poutsma's GP.
The cone biopsy might have been an attempt to retrieve the situation by removing all the cancer, the tribunal said.
Green MP Sue Bradford added her voice yesterday to the call for a full inquiry into Dr Parry's treatment of Northland women.
Cancer care judged disgraceful
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.