KEY POINTS:
A GP faces prosecution following findings he had a sexual relationship with a former patient who later became a practice nurse at his health centre.
The Health and Disability Commissioner, in a report released today, said there was evidence that the doctor, known as Dr A, and the
woman, known as Ms B, had a sexual relationship.
The names of the doctor, woman and medical centre have been removed from the report to protect privacy, after the community health trust concerned laid a complaint in July 2007.
Both parties were originally trained overseas.
The commission found Dr A had breached the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights which enforces the strict prohibition of sexual relationships between doctors and patients, to protect the patient.
"Dr A must have been aware that his relationship with Ms B was unethical," the report said.
The inequality of the relationship was accentuated by the fact that Dr A was also Ms B's employer, and she was vulnerable as both an employee and as a patient. It was irrelevant that the sex was mostly consensual.
"It is the responsibility of the medical practitioner to maintain professional boundaries and ethical standards. Dr A abused the trust of his patient and employee."
Ms B was initially a patient of Dr A for an immigration medical check in 2004 and he apparently made advances on her then.
In 2006 Dr A offered Ms B a position as practice nurse at the centre.
The relationship developed, and Ms B kept a record on her desk calendar the times the pair had sex, whether at the clinic, at home or in motels.
She became angry on one occasion when they had unprotected sex, and about the same time Ms B admitted she became jealous of the attention Dr A was paying a new receptionist.
In 2007 Ms B admitted to the trust to having an affair with Dr A.
Dr A denied to the commissioner that Ms B was his patient and they were intimate. He said she was infatuated and jealous, which led her to see and believe things that did not exist.
However, the commissioner found there was enough evidence to determine there was a sexual relationship.
The case has now been referred to the Director of Proceedings , Theodora Baker, who is in the early stages of processing the charges.
This only happens in a small number of serious cases and Dr A could be deregistered, censured or fined.
The director of the trust concerned has also decided to lay a charge before the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal.
That matter has been deferred until Dr A's current case has been dealt with.
- NZPA
