GP lied about test results to see patient

The doctor sent his female patient about 50 texts, telling her she had 'gotten under [his] skin' and that he was 'overwhelmingly attracted' to her. Photo / Thinkstock

A GP may face disciplinary action after he lied to a patient about abnormal blood test results as an excuse to see her.

Health and Disability Commissioner Anthony Hill today released a report which found the doctor, named only as Dr B, had breached the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights.

The young woman, named as Ms A, had been using Dr B as a GP for three and a half years when last year he gave her his personal mobile number, telling her she could call or send him a text message if she thought she needed help.

He then asked her to go out of town with him to a conference, an invitation she declined.

He later sent her a text message saying her blood test results were "really very wonky" and that he had a gift for her.

They met and he gave her the results of her blood test and a pair of earrings. The blood tests were entirely normal, the HDC report said.

Over a period of five to six weeks, Dr B sent Ms A about 50 texts, telling her she had "gotten under [his] skin" and that he was "overwhelmingly attracted" to her.

Ms A reminded him that he was her doctor and repeatedly indicated that his behaviour was unprofessional and difficult for her to deal with, the report said.

When she suggested she change doctors, he discouraged her. Soon after, she did change her doctor.

The HDC report said it was clinically inappropriate for Dr B to have given the patient his personal mobile number and he had failed to provide care with reasonable care and skill, a breach of the Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers' Rights.

The HDC noted that Dr B had provided a written apology to be forwarded to Ms A and it recommended he remain in a mentoring relationship with two senior GPs.

He was also to be referred to the Director of Proceedings to determine whether any proceedings should be taken and the Medical Council would be asked to consider a review of his competence.