According to the summary of facts outlined in the latest findings, presented to the tribunal at a hearing in March and released this week, Dr S began a relationship with one of her patients known as Mr D in 2019.
Mr D had a history of anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD].
It was his counsellor at the Community Alcohol and Drug Service who informed the Medical Council after the man confessed to being in a sexual relationship with his doctor.
He moved into a granny flat the doctor rented to him in 2020 and moved to another medical practice but she continued to prescribe him a cocktail of drugs including the highly addictive oxycodone and tramadol, which are controlled opioids.
Dr S and Mr D were no longer in a relationship by the time the case was heard earlier this year but a professional conduct committee charged her with being in an inappropriate relationship with a patient, inappropriately prescribing some 60 prescriptions across 20 dates, and either not logging her meetings with him or retrospectively creating electronic logs that she had seen him as a patient.
It was also alleged the doctor had been prescribing the man medicines that were for her own use but on the balance of probabilities the tribunal found that only the sumatriptan - a headache medication - was proven to be for her own use.
However, a condition on her practising certificate stated she could not prescribe for herself or family members because of the disciplinary finding in 2018. This led to another charge being added against her.
In its findings, the tribunal said it was never appropriate for a doctor to engage in a sexual relationship with their patients, but that the situation was exacerbated by Mr D’s history of mental illness.
“This was a significant departure from a standard which has a ‘zero-tolerance’ of sexual relationships with patients. It was clearly unethical and is therefore malpractice and is also conduct likely to bring discredit to the profession.”
It said that prescribing opioids was in itself negligent but giving them to someone she was in a relationship with exacerbated the situation.
It also found her altering of patient records was an attempt to conceal her relationship with Mr D.
“The conduct was not simply naïve or unwise, but was deliberate and unethical,” the tribunal said.
“The misconduct took place over 18 months, with [Dr S] continuing to treat [Mr D] for a further year after entering into a sexual relationship, only stopping after the Medical Council had received a notification about the relationship.”
In deciding on a penalty for the doctor the tribunal noted she began offending just seven months after an earlier finding from the same tribunal where she’d been found to be prescribing herself medicines under the guise they were for family members.
It was put to the tribunal that the doctor had a long history of mental illness, particularly depression and anxiety, and the 2018 decision led to a breakdown in her marriage that left her lonely, vulnerable and unwell.
However, the tribunal found she was unfit to practice and ordered her registration be suspended for at least 12 months and that before reapplying for another one she must complete a psychiatric assessment and an education programme on professional boundaries. It also ordered her to pay $78,000 in legal costs.
Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.
