It also found the GP breached the doctor-patient confidentiality when she told the man his wife had made an appointment with her, after learning about the affair.
The GP must be supervised for three years and pay a penalty of $31,234.
“In this case, the tribunal has not found that [the doctor’s] sexual relationship with [the man] amounted to professional misconduct. The conduct that attracts a penalty is [the doctor’s] decision to pursue a personal relationship with the husband of a patient and her breach of [his wife’s] privacy.”
The man had seen the GP three times since 2006, for blood pressure checks and to remove a small skin tag.
The tribunal found “no suggestion of any improper contact between the parties during consultations”.
The doctor received a Facebook friend request from the man in September 2018, which she deleted. At the time he was her patient.
“The doctor saw and spoke to [the man] on multiple occasions where he worked, and they would communicate on Facebook,” the tribunal said.
“The doctor told the patient she was not comfortable with him messaging her socially while seeing him as a patient. At the end of September 2018, the doctor transferred his care to another practitioner.”
The tribunal said that in October 2018 the doctor felt she was developing some feelings toward the patient, and they continued to message over Facebook.
Around this time, the man’s wife became aware of the affair and sought medical treatment for stress-related symptoms, caused by this news.
“Her appointment was with the doctor. At this point the doctor raised the relationship with her colleagues and said that she did not feel comfortable treating [the man’s wife].”
The tribunal said the doctor then sent the man a text message about his wife’s appointment in breach of her privacy.
“Before she had arrived at the doctor’s, [the man’s wife] received a text message from her husband asking why she had made an appointment to see the GP.”
A copy of a screenshot of the text conversation was produced to the tribunal.
“[The man’s wife] had not told her husband about the appointment, and so she assumed he must have been told by the GP. [The man’s wife] found this extremely distressing and felt that her privacy had been breached. She felt disregarded as a patient and as a person,” the tribunal said.
The man’s wife was seen by a different doctor that day.
The tribunal found that the censured GP “lacked a maturity of thought and self-reflection” and showed “an element of wilful blindness”.
It found “her protestations of naiveté and poor English (which is her first language) were surprising and concerning in an experienced registered medical practitioner”.
The tribunal found she did not seek proper guidance and behave like a professional and trusted general practitioner.
“Even in hindsight, she seemed unable to pinpoint or articulate when or how she failed in her responsibilities, portraying herself as someone to whom things had happened, rather than fully acknowledging her role in the events that led her to the tribunal.”
The GP had separated from her husband in August 2018 but continued to live with him for four months.
She saw her former patient on multiple occasions and they are in a committed relationship.
- RNZ
