Nova Scotia gynecologist found guilty of professional misconduct

A committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia has found aSydney gynecologist guilty of professional misconduct following a hearing into separate allegations from two women who were in his care.

The women, whose names are protected by a publication ban,said Dr. Manivasan Moodley asked them questions of a sexual and personal nature during appointments that were not relevant to their medical issues.

One woman, referred to by the college as A.B., said Moodleyused his fingers to put lubricant on her vagina without her consent, and commented inappropriately on her physical appearance.

The other woman, referred to as C.D., said Moodley unnecessarily made her believe she had cancer, and violated physician and patient boundaries by seeking her out at her workplace.

Moodleysubmitted to the college that he had no recollection of seeing A.B. He also denied the remarks she attributed to him.

As for C.D.'s accusations, Moodley confirmed that he went to her workplace, but denied making inappropriate comments and unnecessarily magnifying the extent of her diagnosis.

The allegations, dating back to 2017,went to a hearing that started in February and wrapped in August following a temporary delay because of COVID-19.

At first, Moodleywas accused of professional misconduct and incompetence. The latter charge was dropped over the course of the hearing.

Earlier this week, the hearing committee released its final decision. It found that Moodley engaged in professional misconduct with both women.

The decision says Moodleybreached professional standards, did not respect professional boundaries, and crossed a sexual boundary.

"Considering his remarks and questions as a whole, Dr. Moodley failed to treat A.B. with dignity and as a person worthy of respect as a vulnerable individual in a professional relationship with a power imbalance," the decision reads.

According to the committee, those remarks and questionsamounted to professional misconduct, but Moodley's failure to obtain A.B.'s consent before applying lubricant to her vagina did not.

"We regard this failure to get consent as a communications problem but not as misconduct."

In the case of C.D., the committee said Moodley'soverall conduct was unprofessional to the level of misconduct.

"As a vulnerable individual in a professional relationship with a power imbalance, [Moodley] did not respect the professional boundary in their physician-patient relationship. Likewise, his sexually-oriented remarks and questions in that relationship were disrespectful and an abuse of his power."

Disagreementon the hearing committee

The decision of the five-person panel was not unanimous. Dr. Naeem Khan said he believed all the allegations against Moodley should have been dismissed.

Khan said he was dissatisfied and disappointed with how the majority came to its conclusions.

"I do not agree with my colleagues that the allegations of A.B. and C.D. are credible and reliable, while the statements of Dr. Moodley are not," Khan wrote in the decision.

"Allegations are not facts. The probability of the complainants' allegations being true is no greater than what Dr. Moodley says is true."

Khan said "the quality of proof is poor" and he was not convinced the allegations of the complainants are true.

Nevertheless, the majority decision stands and the committee is set to convene at least one more time to determine how the doctor will be sanctioned.