Ontario docs are leaving – patients have trouble finding good doctors



from CPSO Website –  Decision posted February 1, 2012
Dr. Richard Alexander Irvine, New Hamburg. On November 15, 2011, the Discipline Committee found that Dr. Irvine committed an act of professional misconduct, in that he engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct.
Dr. Irvine engaged in prescribing to family members contrary to College policy; treating family members for conditions which were not urgent and where other health care professionals were available; and treating family members and not taking steps to transfer their care to other physicians.
The Discipline Committee ordered a public reprimand; a four-month suspension of Dr. Irvine’s certificate of registration; and he is to pay to the College costs in the amount of $3,650.
CPSO Spokeswoman Kathryn Clarke states that the College will not take into consideration Dr. Irvine’s patients who are negatively affected by this decision and many of whom are unable to find a doctor (see link).  It would appear that ultimately the College’s desire to penalize the doc far outweighs the desire to protect patients.  The College’s desire for “blood” would certainly seem to outweigh the slightest glimmer of common sense. 
Congratulations to Dr. Richard Alexander Irvine who should be recommended for treating family members for non-urgent conditions.  All docs do at one time or another and continue to do so fortunately.  Dr. Irvine did what any man would do for his family. Only a miserable bureaucrat penpusher would condemn him for it. Normal people would think he was “nuts” and a bumbling butthead  if he didn’t do the best he could for his nearest and dearest without permission of the CPSO.
The condemnation of this doctor is what happens when common sense is thrown out the window by a group of not-very-bright or successful doctors (and laypeople)  with too much time and not enough work or patients to fill a practice. 
This doc saved family members the unpleasantness of having fo wait for an appointment, lose time, wait in a roomfull of  infected people (or infect others)  and saved the Province the cost of the visit  (doc did not charge OHIP or prescribe narcotics) . 
There should be some perks to being family members of a professional who is expected to put others’ problems, wants and needs ahead of his own every day.  A real man and father cannot stand idly by when he can help a family member for a non-urgent but nevertheless very unpleasant condition, nor should he be expected to do so.  
Question is:  Who made the complaint?
A lawyer or accountant is not prohibited to give free advice to family members 
A plumber/electrician would be a fool to pay someone else to do a job at his home which he can do perfectly well himself. 
The doc can only incur the resentment of his wife and children who know full well that the doc is perfectly able and capable to treat their non-urgent condition. What is the wisdom of letting a family member with a sore throat or other minor ailment on a Friday night muddle thru until at least Monday- possibly worsening the condition and ruining the weekend – when the diagnosis is simple and  medications (samples) are readily available?    
The true reason behind this rule is of course the fear of  politically correct, self-satisfied do-gooders that a doc’s family might get better and faster treatment than the average Ontarian.  So what if they do occasionally?!  It’s highly unlikely to be at the Public’s expense. On the other hand, should a doc’s family member fall ill, I would hope the doc would put his family, not the Public first !
It is unknown at this time what the list of forbidden medical relationships according to the CPSO is. Brothers, sisters, in-laws, cousins, uncles, aunts, parents, grandparents  ………….   etc. etc.  No official list of forbidden relationships has ever been issued according to a reliable source at the College.
Wouldn’t be surprised if they’re working on one. Problem is, they’ll risk looking even more ridiculous than they already do.
Following are the names of the not very bright busybodies  who think they know what’s good for Ontarians and who attacked and penalized a doc for giving his family some extra attention:

Dr. Marc Gabel (Chair)

El-Tantawy Attia (Ph.D.)

Dr. Carole Clapperton

Ms   Diane Doherty

Dr. Richard Mackenzie  

Pathetic creatures without principles who make an ass of the Law !  None of them are morally entitled to sit in judgment of their colleagues.

As for giving the doctor a reprimand;    These people haven’t the moral highground to reprimand a dog !
These  “men” and two “women”  (who certainly ought to know better) punished a doc for treating (healing) family members but see nothing ethically wrong with allowing  perfectly normal, late-stage unborn babies to be aborted/murdered/destroyed and will penalize any doctor who tries to save such little lives  –  no different from very premature babies where no effort and expense are spared to pull them through and give them a chance. The age at which preemies can be saved is getting younger all the time. Is murdering an unborn baby somehow not murder if the child is still inside its mother?    



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

et cetera
%d bloggers like this: