Small-town GP cleared of misconduct for starting relationship with patient a month after final consult

A GP accused of misconduct for starting a relationship with a patient a few weeks after their therapeutic relationship ended has been cleared.

The Medical Board of Australia spent three years investigating the relationship after a complaint.

By the time of the tribunal hearing in April this year, the couple had had a child together.

The tribunal heard that the GP, whose name was suppressed, had met the patient in 2019 while working in a town of 2300 people, “where everyone knows everyone or knows of everyone”.

The medical board alleged the patient was vulnerable because of their 20-year age difference and because she had chronic pain.

Additionally, the relationship had begun “very shortly” after their final consultation.

The tribunal heard that the GP had treated the patient eight times, including for a URTI, dysmenorrhoea and pain following a laparoscopy, prescribing short-term oxycodone and tramadol.

The patient, aged 22 when the pair had met, told the tribunal she had booked with whoever was available and the consultations were “insignificant”.

“She recalled during appointments the practitioner being professional, she did not once feel intimidated or uncomfortable, there was no flirtatious exchange between them and she did not feel any sense of emotional or other dependence on the practitioner,” the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal said.

About a week after her last appointment — a phone consultation regarding pathology results and iron supplement scripts — the pair had become Facebook friends when the patient thanked the GP for lending a kayak to mutual acquaintances.

From there, they had exchanged several messages.

“The tribunal has read them all,” it said. [We accept] the expert’s opinion and finds those messages were light hearted banter.

“They are redolent with punctuation and capitals for emphasis, emojis, and refer to various subjects of a social nature.”

It went on to stress that they have been exchanged at a time when “social contact in the Australian community was the subject of considerable upheaval because of restrictions imposed by COVID”.

“The exchanges include photographs of their pet dogs, other peoples’ pets, scenery and wildlife. They do not contain any sexual or sexualised content.”

The GP told the tribunal they met again in person at a gathering of mutual friends and that their relationship had evolved naturally.

It had become sexual in May 2020, and the GP had left the practice about six weeks later.

Another GP, who was also not named, gave evidence that doctor–patient boundaries were challenging in “small community settings” based on his experience.

The expert GP had practised for 29 years in the town where he grew up and where his children went to school.

The tribunal — which also said the patient had recurrent pain, not chronic pain — concluded there was no evidence that the GP had taken advantage of the patient.

It said the therapeutic relationship was short, uncomplicated and “ended naturally”.

“The tribunal finds the sexual relationship started in the context of activities totally disassociated with the doctor–patient relationship.”

The source of the complaint against the GP is not identified in the tribunal’s findings.

You're missing out on this article.