Martin DeRuyter/Stuff
Police recruits now see their own GP undergoing medical examination. (File photo)
A doctor found guilty of professional misconduct during his in-depth investigations of police recruits dropped all charges and had his name removed.
The Disciplinary Board of Health Experts determined that parts of the studies were not necessary or that their purpose had not been properly explained to the recruits.
It found the doctor guilty of professional misconduct, but did not impose a sanction. Now a Supreme Court judge has quashed the finding of wrongdoing and dismissed all charges.
Justice David Gendall said there was no allegation of sexual inappropriate conduct.
READ MORE:
* Doctor fines $30,000 for accessing friends’ and acquaintances’ medical records
* Doctor who performed inappropriate breast exams named
*’I’m Shocked It Wasn’t Enough’: Doctor’s Victims Dismayed on Appeal
*NZ-born woman sues Australian doctor after inappropriate ‘massage’ her during skin check
One digital rectal exam was done on a woman with a chronic medical condition, but data from another person examined in the same way was largely lost and the doctor could only say that he wouldn’t have done the exam without reason.
The perineal area, between the anus and genitals, of six or eight recruits was visually examined while the doctor looked for “lumps and bumps.”
The doctor stood behind three recruits as they bent over and it appeared that the court found the request largely intimate and inappropriate because the recruits were wearing g-strings. Otherwise, it was a mandatory part of a study to check for flexibility and musculoskeletal problems.
The judge said the doctor’s explanation to the recruits about the bend examination was sufficient and the charges related to it should have been dismissed.
At the time — between 1998 and 2006 — police asked doctors to ensure the recruit’s perfect health, justifying the doctor’s full and thorough approach, he said.
The doctor was examined after a police officer complained about his behavior 15 years after she was questioned.
A police investigation found other complainants. No criminal charges were filed, but a complaint was filed with the Medical Council, leading to professional disciplinary proceedings.
Dean Kozanic / Stuff
Judge David Gendall allowed the doctor’s appeal against a finding of misconduct. (File photo)
The doctor appealed the finding of the misconduct and the suspension decision.
The judge upheld both parts of the appeal.
The court’s decision was confused and at one point appeared to say that the doctor’s behavior was not serious enough to warrant a disciplinary sanction, but then found that the allegations of misconduct had been proven anyway, he said. .
Since the court had ruled that the case was not serious enough to warrant a fine, it was inconsistent to refuse to have his name suppressed, as the publication of his name was arguably the greatest punishment the doctor could face, he said. the judge.
Also, the two expert doctors who testified in court were not critical of the doctor for conducting the intimate examinations he did, and one who had authorized the police medical examination required that those cases be checked.
A check for hemorrhoids was expected on a police investigation form.
One of the experts said they had never seen a requirement for a doctor to certify “perfect health” and for the doctor to act like some sort of bloodhound. There was very little or no training on how to do it.
The doctor said he had changed his practice to address any potential concerns.
The court was told that the recruits’ own GPs are now conducting the medical examinations.