Rebuke, no charges for GP over affair

A married doctor who had a brief affair with a woman who had been a recent patient has escaped disciplinary charges.

New Zealand Doctor magazine reported yesterday that Health and Disability Commissioner Ron Paterson had said the GP behaved unethically but he would not seek charges.

Mr Paterson condemned the affair in an inquiry decision this week as "ethically inappropriate", but took into account the steps the GP took after the patient disclosed a "crush", the insight he showed, and his agreement to mentoring for two years.

The doctor and his practice location were not identified.

The woman said she took her young daughter to see the GP six times in 2008. The GP had paid her compliments and flirted with her.

The doctor recalled their conversations as "friendly, frank and open".

The woman visited the GP alone twice in 2008 when her regular doctor was unavailable.

On October 28, 2008, she confessed to having a "crush" on the GP, who explained that often happened in the doctor-patient relationship and said it could not result in a relationship.

They also discussed her marital difficulties and anxiety about a new job.

The following day the GP discussed the matter with a colleague and documented the experience.

Later that month the doctor received a handwritten note from the woman and then called her.

She told the inquiry he assured her they could continue having a doctor-patient relationship, whereas the GP said he terminated the professional relationship.

The pair emailed each other early last year and had sex once. In one message the doctor said their relationship was inappropriate.

In the May, the GP's wife discovered the affair, the couple met the woman and the GP's wife phoned the husband, bringing the affair to a close.

In her complaint, the woman told Mr Paterson the doctor took advantage of her while she was vulnerable. She and her husband split up and the man told the commissioner the affair had harmed him and their children.

The doctor also claimed to be vulnerable because of an illness and his own marital difficulties.

Mr Paterson said in his decision he didn't consider it ever ethically appropriate for a doctor to enter a relationship with a recent patient.

"The development of an intimate relationship cannot be excused because the doctor is himself vulnerable.

"As the professional, it is the doctor's responsibility to take steps to avoid any blurring of boundaries in the doctor-patient relationship."

The GP admitted he made a grave error of judgment.

- NZPA