Health Ombudsman v JRK

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Health Ombudsman v JRK [2023] QCAT 545

PARTIES:

HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(applicant)

v

JRK

(respondent)

APPLICATIONNO/S:

OCR353-22

MATTERTYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVEREDON:

14 November 2023 (ex tempore)

HEARINGDATE:

14 November 2023

HEARDAT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judicial Member Robertson Assisted by:

Dr R Pitelli Dr J Quinn

Mrs K Thomson

ORDERS:

It is the decision of the Tribunal that:

    Pursuant to s 107(2)(b)(iii) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) (‘the HO Act’), the Tribunal finds that the respondent has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct;

    Pursuant to s 107(3)(a) of the HO Act, the respondent is reprimanded;

    Pursuant to s 107(3)(d) of the HO Act, the respondent’s registration is suspended for a period of one (1) month to commence on 18 December 2023; and

    No orders as to costs.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES — HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS — MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS — DISCPLINARY PROCEEDINGS — PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

— where the respondent is a general practitioner — where the respondent engaged in a consensual sexual relationship with a patient — where the patient was vulnerable — where the respondent demonstrated very significant insight and remorse — where the respondent presents no risk to any patient — where the respondent has taken significant steps

to address the causes of her misconduct and to prevent future occurrence

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld)

Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (Queensland)

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

Health Ombudsman v Stephens [2020] QCAT 510 Health Ombudsman v Veltmeyer [2021] QCAT 77

Medical Board of Australia v Dr Haifi [2018] VCAT 1788 Medical Board of Australia v Todd [2018] SAHPT 12 Wilks v Medical Practitioners Board of Victoria (Occupational and Business Regulation) [2007] VCAT 2439

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	T Harding, Legal Officer of the Office of the Health Ombudsman
Respondent:	K Skene, solicitor of Avant Law

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

1. On 23 December 2022, the applicant Director on behalf of the Health Ombudsman filed a referral to the Tribunal seeking disciplinary findings and orders against the respondent on the basis of one allegation: failure to maintain professional boundaries with a patient (‘Patient A’) during 2021. The respondent is a registered medical practitioner. She was first registered by the Medical Board of Australia (‘Board’) in 2014. Prior to that she was a registered nurse. She is a specialist general practitioner (‘GP’) and she is currently 55 years old.

Conduct subject of the referral

1. The parties have filed a statement of agreed facts. The nature and extent of the relationship the subject of the allegation was not in dispute. Patient A first consulted the respondent on 7 May 2021. Patient A was suffering post-traumatic stress disorder due to an accident at his workplace and he had an extant WorkCover claim with NT WorkSafe. The respondent initially prescribed antipsychotic medication for him and referred him to a psychiatrist. She accepts that Patient A was vulnerable. But there is no suggestion…