Health Ombudsman v Whittaker

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Health Ombudsman v Whittaker [2020] QCAT 180

PARTIES:

HEALTH OMBUDSMAN

(applicant)

v

GARY JAMES WHITTAKER

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR110-18

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DATE OF DECISION:

10 October 2019

DATE OF REASONS:

26 June 2020

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judge Allen QC, Deputy President

Assisted by:
Dr Slaughter
Dr Snow
Ms Felton

ORDERS:

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

2.   Pursuant to section 107(3)(a) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld), the respondent is reprimanded;

3.   Pursuant to s 107(3)(d) of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld), the respondent’s registration is suspended for a period of 13 months commencing on 31 October 2019; and

4.   Each party bear their own costs of the proceeding.

CATCHWORDS:

PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS – MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT AND UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT – where the respondent is a general practitioner – where the respondent engaged in a sexual relationship with a patient under his care – where the parties agree as to the characterisation of the conduct and sanction – whether the proposed sanction is appropriate –

Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) s 103, s 104, s 107.

REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	Office of the Health Ombudsman
Respondent:	Minter Ellison
APPEARANCES:	This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The Tribunal made orders in this matter on 10 October 2019. These are the reasons for the Tribunal’s decision.

2. The orders followed upon a referral of a health service complaint against Dr Gary James Whittaker (“respondent”) pursuant to section 103(1)(a) and section 104 of the Health Ombudsman Act 2013 (Qld) (“the HO Act”) by the Director of Proceedings on behalf of the Health Ombudsman. The parties had reached agreement as to the material facts, the characterisation of the conduct and proposed sanction. It remained, however, for the Tribunal to be satisfied as to whether, in fact, the charge was made out and whether the proposed orders for sanction were appropriate.

3. The respondent is currently 60 years of age. He was 54 to 56 years of age at the time of the conduct the subject of the referral. The respondent was first registered as a medical practitioner on 8 January 1985. The respondent has maintained a suburban general practice from 1986 until the suspension of this registration pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal. The respondent’s conduct related to a patient of the respondent’s general practice (“the patient”).

4. The patient first became a patient of the respondent in early 2013. From that time onwards the patient sought treatment by the respondent for various health issues, including physical injury and mental health issues, including depression. During 2013, the respondent noted the patient’s symptoms of depression and suicidal ideation. The respondent…