A paediatrician who indecently assaulted two teenage family members while they were living with him claims there was no sexual motivation behind his offending. Photo / Getty Images
A paediatrician who indecently assaulted two teenage family members while they were living with him claims there was no sexual motivation behind his offending. Photo / Getty Images
WARNING: This article deals with indecent assault and may be upsetting.
A retired paediatrician who hopped into bed with two teenage sisters, touched one’s bottom and exposed the other’s breasts, has been struck off for indecent assault.
The doctor, who has name suppression and is identified as Dr A, toldthe Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal there was no sexual motivation for his actions and he wanted to come out of retirement to practise again.
However, the tribunal rejected the doctor’s suggestion there was no sexual motivation behind his prolonged and inappropriate conduct and said he lacked insight into, and understanding of, his offending which made him a risk to patients and the public.
In a decision published today, the tribunal said the doctor pleaded guilty in the Auckland District Court in March 2021 to two representative charges of indecent assault.
The charges represented a number of incidents during a year-long period in 2009 when the two sisters were aged 17 and 19, and had moved to Dr A’s home to study at university.
Dr A was a family member and medical practitioner and the teenagers should have been able to rely on him not to abuse their trust, the decision said.
Dr A graduated in 1974 with a Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery and was awarded his general scope in June 2000, becoming a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians (RACP) in 2012, specialising in paediatrics.
At the time of the offending he was working in a hospital as a paediatric registrar.
The indecent assaults began as hugs between Dr A and both victims, who also have name suppression. They described becoming uncomfortable with how long the hugs would last - up to 40 seconds.
Dr A then began touching and stroking one victim’s buttocks on the outside of her clothing, and on occasion, placing his hands under her jeans and underwear and touching and stroking her bottom “skin on skin” while hugging her.
On multiple occasions he entered the girl’s bedroom in the early hours of the morning and got into bed next to her, wrapping his arms around her from behind to hug her.
On some occasions, Dr A would place his hand under the victim’s blouse and stroke her stomach with his hand.
When he attempted to place his hand higher up underneath the victim’s blouse she pressed her arm strongly against her chest so that his hand could not go higher.
Once Dr A asked the teeanger to sit next to him on the couch so they could play a game.
“Dr A touched her thigh and asked her what muscle it was. He then attempted to lift her blouse above her breasts so that her bra became exposed. The victim pushed Dr A’s hand away and immediately got up off the couch.”
On another occasion, Dr A got into bed with both victims. Dr A placed his hand on the buttocks of the second victim and performed a rubbing motion on the outside of her bed clothing.
She tried to move away and as she moved she felt Dr A’s hand around her body.
He then placed his hand underneath her pyjamas and thermal layers. She pushed Dr A’s hand away.
The doctor placed his hand inside her sweater on the outside of her clothing in the direction of her chest and she moved away. The teen then got out of bed and woke her [family member] to remove her.
The doctor brought his profession into disrepute and undermined public trust in doctors when he indecently assaulted two teenage girls living in his home. Photo / 123rf
Dr A once entered the second victim’s bedroom while she was in bed and got into her single bed lying beside her.
When she sat up to get out of bed, Dr A grabbed her by the wrist before allowing her to get out.
In explanation, Dr A later said he had been worried about the girl’s younger sister being away for two nights and went to the older sister’s room to question her.
He claimed he “joined her in the bed totally worried, and asked her if she knew where her sister was”.
Allegations of the offending were made in 2019 and after police notified the Medical Council a Professional Conduct Committee was engaged to investigate, bringing charges against Dr A to a tribunal hearing in June last year.
Dr A did not attend the hearing because of his mental health but asserted he was fit to practise.
The tribunal rejected this, saying it had concerns about Dr A’s fitness to practise because of his health issues, his judgement and his insight.
“The tribunal does not consider Dr A has a good understanding of his offending at all. He has suggested to this tribunal that there was no sexual motive for his offending.
“It is difficult for the tribunal to comprehend how Dr A could plead guilty to two representative charges of indecent assault, which included touching his [family members’] buttocks underneath her clothing (skin on skin) and attempting to lift his [family member’s] blouse to expose her breasts, and then ask the tribunal to accept that there was nothing sexual in his conduct.”
The tribunal noted the effect of the offending on the victims was “long-lasting” with serious consequences for both women, according to Judge Peter Winter.
The tribunal said if Dr A did not realise the enormity of his convictions at the time he pleaded guilty, he must have realised when he avoided a term of imprisonment only by serving a period of home detention.
It said a paediatrician often came close to touching very personal parts of the body during some patient examinations.
Dr A admitted the charges and the tribunal found him guilty of professional misconduct.
In cancelling his registration for at least three years, the tribunal said it must consider the protection of potential patients and their families.
“Although no concerns have been raised about inappropriate conduct with patients, when a practitioner has been convicted of indecent assault but does not accept that the conduct was sexual and does not see the need to attend a sexual misconduct assessment test, it raises serious questions about his judgment and fitness to practise.”
It also censured Dr A and ordered the pensioner to pay costs of $9150.
