Ontario docs are leaving – patients have trouble finding good doctors


CPSO Spokeswoman and Associate Director Communications  –  Jill Hefley  
(416) 967-2600 ext. 445


“We don’t have any authority over them or what they charge,” said Jill Hefley, associate director of communications with the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Hefley also noted that, if people feel they’re being unfairly charged, they should complain to the College.

After stating the CPSO has no authority in this matter, Ms Hefley encourages patients to complain to the College about an issue over which she just claimed the College has no authority whatsoever, making herself and the CPSO look like a silly joke.
——Only at 80 College St.  ——- 


  Jill Hefley,  CPSO Spokeswoman & Associate Director of Communications   (back row, second from right)


{May 29, 2013}   Henry Morgentaler dead




Melekh Ravitch, Chava, unkhown, Melekh’s wife and Chava’s husband,
Henry Morgentaler, Montreal 1950’s. Photo from Chava Rosenfarb’s website.









On the couch

Arlene Leibovitch, Marsha Weiner, Henry Morgentaler










Henry’s parents and sister were murdered by the Nazi’s and of course Henry was powerless to save them. Profound shock, pain and rage must have been part of Henry’s life for a very long time and it would be reasonable to assume pain and anger never left him. 

Henry would make a career out of killing  unborn  –   mostly non-Jewish   –    babies and finally would hold power over life and death.
Few will fail to see the connection.


There are those who feel it is a woman’s right to kill an unwanted child she carries within her body.
There were those who felt it was a country’s right to kill unwanted Jews living within its borders.  
Who could justify either? 
Some might argue that if it was alright for Henry Morgentaler to rid the world of unwanted babies,  then it was alright to rid the world of unwanted Jews. Fortunately no sane and rational person would consider this acceptable  –  just as most sane human beings do not consider it acceptable to kill unborn babies.
War criminals were pursued to the ends of the earth to bring them to justice for murdering the “unwanted”.

Henry Morgentaler received an order of Canada for killing the “unwanted”……………….. 
In most families a miscarriage is a tragedy. The Canadian Government rewards the killing of “nuisance” babies.
Feminist and author Judy Rebick told the Globe and Mail that it was time Morgentaler was honoured for his long battle. She said, “Dr. Morgentaler is a hero to millions of women in the country”. “He risked his life to struggle for women’s rights”.
There are those who see it differently and feel Henry Morgentaler had revenge for the murder of his parents and sister every time he aborted a non-Jewish child.  Henry risked his life to kill more unborn babies.
“I knew I could not save my mother [in Auschwitz in 1944]. But I could save other mothers.  It was an unconscious thought. It became almost like a command. If I help women to have babies at a time when they can give love and affection, they will not grow up to be rapists or murderers. They will not build concentration camps.”

Well, this seems to have applied to Henry at least. Henry clearly wasn’t wanted as he landed in a concentration camp. As far as is known, Henry didn’t become a rapist though he did not remain faithful to three wives   –  but he did go on to become the executioner of thousands of unborn  –  mostly non-Jewish  –  babies.


Henry’s logic was of course severely flawed though no one seems to have contradicted him. Being “wanted” is no guarantee for good behaviour, Most “unwanted” children don’t grow up to be rapists and murderers and will not build concentration camps but at least his flawed thinking allowed Henry to soothe his conscience and justify revenge thru killing.



Henry Morgentaler’s children:  Goldie, Abraham, Yann and Benny bear the heavy burden of their father’s legacy. 
Henry’s wife Arlene is reported to be suffering from cancer.




LETTER: Colleges are distorting patient care in Canada

on May 10, 2013 for The Medical Post

Re: “Are the colleges ballooning out of control?” (April 23)


I read with interest the article about the colleges “ballooning out of control.” I have long been intending to write my own opinion piece on the subject (though anonymously, as I too live in fear of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario).

This hypermoralistic and bloated bureaucracy has gone too far in the direction of harsh punitiveness. For example, if there were some 20,000 complaints as indicated in the story between 2004 and 2011 and there are only about 25,000 MDs in Ontario, it implies that within a decade every single doctor will receive a complaint.

Are most doctors bad apples? How could the college maintain that the process is mostly valid given these numbers?

Everything in our society indicates that complaints are abused and people use them as vindictive tools; over-publicizing of the process has essentially made it easy for an angry individual to punish a doctor. Distortion is caused by the media hyper-informing the public of the same old news-selling story that bad doctors harm the public unregulated, when the opposite is true.

If there were some spirit of balance in the CPSO, this state of affairs would be tolerable and we doctors could work with confidence. But for colleges to take immaterial complaints seriously perpetuates a degradation of the profession. In the courts people are considered innocent until proven guilty; why the college’s harsh standard?

A frequently seen example in daily practice is the “threat of complaint” in which angry patients—for example, those demanding antibiotics—threaten to complain to the college if they don’t get their prescriptions. Most doctors cave in to save themselves the headache of a complaint. Does the college feel MDs giving in to such patients are innocent or rather lapsing in ethics, when they themselves are creating such a “reign of terror” in engendering the situation? Would they not agree they are distorting patient care for many of us in the same way over-litigiousness distorts health care in the United States?

Perhaps the CPSO doesn’t understand the distortions it is causing, in which case an open discussion with all Ontario MDs should be started.—Anonymous, MD, Toronto




It’s a shame this physician feels he/she has to remain anonymous in this very reasonable, polite letter, too fearful to openly stand behind his/her opinions which are no doubt shared by many others. If a child were as fearful of a parent or a dog of its owner as physicians are of the College, there would be every reason to suspect “abuse”.

A physician who fears the College cannot be the “best” physician for his patients. He/she might fear to use initiative or simply comply with patients’ wishes – even if they are not in the patients’ best interest  –  only to avoid complaints. The result is the mediocre medical care Ontario has offered for years now as those who refuse to be intimidated leave for the U.S. or other locations.


Perhaps the doctor who wrote this “Letter” would feel less diffident if he/she had a peek at the following posts to see who/what the CPSO actually is and who/what his/her hard-earned money (no benefits, pension or other perks) is funding.  When analyzing “the College” and its “Employees”, “Respect” is not a word most would use in connection with many College Employees, Council Members and various others on CPSO’s generous payroll. :




It’s not unthinkable that DoctorsOntario –  after dealing with the OMA, will direct its full attention to the CPSO  (see link).



Actually the College appears frightened to meet physicians one-on-one. It is said that Registrar Rocco Gerace once refused to see a certain disgruntled female pysician regarding a disagreement.  She had come to the College and wished to see him personally to have a rational, adult conversation instead of relying on “correspondence” between herself and the College.  Rocco was available, however, he became frightened and panicked when it became evident he was meeting with a woman who clearly wasn’t in the least intimidated or impressed by him. Not used to being confronted so directly, he went into his office and closed the door, not coming out until the coast was clear. The physician’s resolve was to be admired. Women don’t want to wait for Committees to settle disputes or disagreements; they want to identify what’s wrong and settle the matter …..   fast!  How on earth would we raise our children if we couldn’t settle simple disputes on the spot ?! 

Some male physicians have requested personal interviews to discuss minor problems with College Employees or its Registrar in the past. They have been rebuffed. Heaven forbid a simple problem should be resolved easily and cheaply when it could be done expensively, taking ample time and manpower. The College much prefers to communicate via “formal”correspondence, intended to intimidate  –   not solve anything  –  while ensuring the proper Committees and its Members continue to be fed a steady stream of “work”,  justifying the existence of the CPSO and its many hangers-on. See link below for just one example:





{May 14, 2013}   OMA facing Castration



Ontario doctor group hires self-described union ‘bully’ as advisor and chief negotiator

Written by JERED STUFFCO on May 13, 2013 for The Medical Post

A doctors’ groups that’s been a thorn in the side of the Ontario Medical Association in recent years has hired a controversial union leader to help grow its ranks.

The Coalition of Family Physicians and Specialists of Ontario (COFPS) announced the hiring of Craig Bromell as the group’s new advisor and chief negotiator.

Bromell is a former Toronto police union leader who allegedly used intimidation and forceful tactics to silence critics during his tenure from 1997 to 2003. He even called himself a “bully” for his methods.

COFPS president Dr. Douglas Mark said brining Bromell to the physician realm will help the group attract more members.

“We’re very excited to be able to make this announcement today,” Dr. Mark said in a press release.

The announcement follows a decision from COFPS in December to rebrand itself as DoctorsOntario, which aims to take a more active role in negotiating with the government over fee deals.


Dr. Mark told the Medical Post in December that DoctorsOntario would strive to do more than simply attack the OMA.

“Craig Bromell is a legend in the world of unions and negotiating. We feel very fortunate that he has agreed to work with the doctors of Ontario in hopes of improving our situation,” said Dr. Mark this week.

Bromell, once a disgruntled constable who rallied officer support over a government move to restrict firearm usage for police, said the OMA has been disappointing physicians for too long.

“To be honest, I was initially reluctant when Dr. Mark approached me,” Bromell said in a press release. “However, after meeting with him and other representatives of DoctorsOntario, I’ve come to realize that physicians are in dire need of professional help—especially at the negotiating table.”

Added Dr. Mark: “It’s become obvious to us after the last round of negotiations…that politicians need physician input right from the start in order to come up with viable, lasting solutions. Adding Craig Bromell to our team levels the playing field and dramatically changes the nature of the conversation.”







The following is a comment on Colin Leslie’s article “Who will watch the watchers”



May 1, 9:02 pm by MICHAEL.BOTTOMLEY.1 (CITY, NF) 

For forty years, I had always thought of the CPSO as a benign organization like its glossy self-promoting magazine. However, after I was late in payment of their annual fee while on a convalescent leave of absence, I had a rude awakening. This is a vicious organization which not only removes a licence for such a trivial offence, but refuses all requests for an interview. It treats physicians as roadkill and not human beings.




CPSO Council Members do not deny themselves any gastronomic luxuries but a sick colleague gets no compassion when he is late paying his annual fee while recuperating from illness and may (or may not) have had financial difficulties.



See also:   https://badpatients.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/spotlight-on-the-luxurious-lifestyle-of-cpso-council-members/









Carolyn Silver, senior counsel for the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, says the college has ordered revocation in cases where it is not mandated by the letter of the law, when it is in the public interest to do so.

Carolyn D. Silver



Called to the bar: 1996 (ON)




Legal Services
80 College St.
Toronto, Ontario M5G 2E2
Phone: 416-967-2600 Ext: 239
Fax: 416-967-2647




Shenda Tanchak—Registrar and CEO
College of Physiotherapists of Ontario

formerly employed as Investigator, Policy Analyst and Advisor 
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Shenda Tanchak (right)

 Shenda Tanchak has been the Registrar and CEO of the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario (CPO)
since June 2012.

Shenda received her LLB from the University of Toronto and was called to the bar in 1992. She has more than
18 years of experience working in the health regulatory community, and joined CPO from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario where she most recently served as Senior Advisor to the Executive Office.


Shenda’s progressive experience in the regulatory environment includes diverse roles such as Complaints Investigator, Manager of Complaints, Policy Analyst, Manager of Policy and Manager of Special Projects.


Known throughout the regulatory community as a compelling speaker, educator and thought leader, Shenda demonstrates the complete range of skills required to ensure the College continues to deliver on its mission, vision and strategic goals. 



Contact Us

College of Physiotherapists of Ontario
375 University Avenue
Suite 901
Toronto, Ontario
M5G 2J5
Tel: 416-591-3828
Toll Free: 800-583-5885
Fax: 416-591-3834
General email:info@collegept.org
Web: www.collegept.org
contact Shenda at:   stanchak@collegept.org
                             tel.:   Tel: 416-591-3828, ext. 252


Written by DIANA DUONG on May 1, 2013 for The Medical Post
Doctors across Canada are showing supporting for the New Brunswick Medical Society’s struggle against the provincial government’s cuts to the medical services budget.
A letter addressed to Premier David Alward bears 14 signatures showing support from each provincial medical association and the national Canadian Medical Association, was sent today. New Brunswick’s physicians will address the issue at an emergency general meeting planned for May 3.
The letter calls for premier Alward to respect signed agreements and to collaborate with New Brunswick’s physicians to negotiate issues.
“Breaking a signed agreement with your doctors sends an ominous message that you believe you can proceed to make health care decisions without consulting the physicians who deliver the care,” states the open letter. “That is bad medicine.”
A feud between the government and physicians in the province has been brewing for months, and Health Minister Ted Flemming claimed in March he was told to “stick it” by doctors over budget talks.
Last month, medicare billings were cut by $18.8 million for the 2013-14 budget, freezing any growth in the health care budget, and capping medicare payments at $425 million for the next two years.
Despite the cap, doctors are not allowed to turn away patients, said NBMS CEO Anthony Knight, as reported by CBC.
The New Brunswick Medical Society has threatened on challenging the government in court over the medicare cuts.
On Monday, NBMS president Dr. Robert Desjardins visited colleagues across the country, receiving a “strong reaction from coast to coast,” as said in the statement.
“Physicians across the country are watching New Brunswick,” he said in a press release. “They understand the damage the Alward government has done to its relationship with doctors, and they supported our desire to address the real problems with health system sustainability



Written by Colin Leslie on April 23, 2013 for The Medical Post

When senior editor Julia Belluz and I talked six months ago during the planning stages of the colleges investigation, we decided we wanted to see whether we could gather data from the provincial regulatory bodies that would allow us to compare the colleges to address two questions:

• Are the colleges being run efficiently?

• Are the colleges fair to doctors?

You’ll find our coverage that tries to answer these questions on page eight (efficiency) and page 10 (fairness).

In general, the colleges and their national body, the Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada, were good about being transparent and making their data available.

The key challenge is that without pan-Canadian standards, how the colleges track what they do varies widely province to province.

So who, as a matter of course, is watching what the colleges do?

There are, to be sure, independent financial audits making sure the receipts match up and such things.

But beyond that much of the responsibility falls upon you, the doctors of Canada. You’re a self-regulating profession. You elect most of the physicians who make up the majority of council members across the nation (see below).

Of course, it is hard for groups to exercise that duty democratically without data and guidance.

There is no equivalent of parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page, whose term just ended, or former auditor-general Sheila Fraser looking at the colleges periodically.

Maybe there should be. Even the overseers need oversight.

There is no evidence that it is, but the colleges’ attitude cannot be: “We’re quasi-judicial bodies and it costs what it costs to do our work.”

Yes, of course, the colleges are there to protect the public first and foremost, but looking for efficiencies and boosting accountability and fairness must be goals of all Canadian institutions.

Lastly, journalism like this takes a lot of reporting muscle and I want to thank Julia for co-ordinating this investigation and reporter-intern Diana Duong for organizing the college data into a large database for this project. MP



College # council
# MDs MDs selected Lay members
B.C. 15 10 Elected by doctors by district. Five, appointed by health minister.
Alberta 16 12 11 elected by doctors. One is dean of medicine (shared by the two deans in Alta.; they alternate attendance). Four, appointed by health minister public.
Sask. 18 13 12 elected by doctors. One by dean of medicine or designate. Five, all Lieutenant Governor in council appointments.
Manitoba 22 18 Most elected by constituency. Two are appointed by the dean of medicine. One is elected from the learners and physician assistants. Two are elected by council. Two are appointed by government.
Ontario 32 – 34 19 16 doctors are elected by their peers on a geographical basis. Three physicians are appointed from among the six faculties of medicine in Ontario. Between 13 and 15 public members are appointed by the provincial government.
Quebec 28 24 20 are elected. Four physician members are postgraduate vice-deans of four faculties of medicine in province. Office of professions, a governmental body that regulates professional orders, selects the four lay members.
N.B. 17 13 12 elected. One appointed by health minister. Four, appointed by health minister from list offered by college.
P.E.I. 9 7 Six elected by membership.
One appointed by government.
Both are appointed by government.
N.S. 15 10 Six elected by membership. One appointed by Dalhousie University. One by Doctors Nova Scotia. Five, appointed by the provincial government.
N.L. 13 members of council and registrar who is an ex-officio member. 10 Seven are elected by doctors. Two are appointed by health minister by nominations received from the NLMA. One is appointed by Memorial University of Newfoundland. Three, appointed by health minister.




et cetera