|
Dr. Robert Archambeault and Dr. B This matter came before a panel of the Discipline Committee in Council Chambers of the College of Optometrists of Ontario at 6 Crescent Rd, Toronto on Friday August 1, 2008. The hearing was called to order at 9:30 a.m. The panel was introduced by the chair, and it was explained that counsel for Dr. B was participating via teleconference. Allegation The allegations against Dr. Robert Archambeault and Dr. B were contained in the Notice of Hearing dated June 6, 2007. Counsel for the College filed a Notice of Hearing outlining the allegations of professional misconduct against the members. The allegations were that Dr. Robert Archambeault and Dr. B had: Committed an act of professional misconduct in that in the year 2006 and continuing the members engaged in conduct or performed an act or acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional or unethical. Uncontested Facts Dr. Robert Archambeault is an Optometrist practising in Windsor, Ontario in association with Dr. B. Dr. Robert Archambeault was alleged to have made remarks and comments that were disparaging and disrespectful, regarding another optometrist’s character and business practices to a number of patients. These comments continued after both verbal and written cautions were sent from the Executive Committee to Dr. Robert Archambeault to desist. In addition, Dr. B is alleged to have made disrespectful and rude remarks to a patient. Evidence At the hearing the panel considered the following exhibits: 1) Notice of Hearing, 2) Agreed Statement of Facts, 3) Joint Submission on Penalty, 4) Support Letters for Dr. Robert Archambeault. The panel heard from College Counsel who presented the Agreed Statement of Facts, which Counsels for the defendants agreed to. From schedule “A” of exhibit 1 the panel was made aware of 12 separate incidents where Dr. Robert Archambeault was alleged to have made or allowed staff of his to make disparaging remarks regarding another optometrist. Members’ Position Dr. Robert Archambeault admits to the conduct set out in paragraphs 4,5,6,7,8 and 11 of schedule “A” to the Notice of Hearing and the parties agreed that these facts support a finding of professional misconduct as detailed in paragraph 1 of the Notice of Hearing dated June 6, 2007. The parties also agree that the evidence would not support a finding of guilt on the allegation of professional misconduct against Dr. B set out in paragraph 2 of the Notice of Hearing and detailed in schedule “B”, and that the panel should dismiss the allegation against her. The Issues Allegations were brought forward against two members that worked together. There are two issues the panel identified: 1. Do the agreed statement of facts provide enough evidence to support a finding of professional misconduct against Dr. Robert Archambeault and, 2. Is there insufficient evidence in the agreed statement of facts to support the allegations of professional misconduct against Dr. B? Findings and Reasons The panel’s first task was to determine if there was enough evidence in the Agreed Statement of Facts to support a finding of professional misconduct. The panel recognizes that Dr. Robert Archambeault was under a significant amount of personal stress. Regardless of this, the member is responsible for separating personal difficulties from professional obligations. In not doing so there is clearly potential for injury to the patient/professional relationship. As such patient care may be compromised. Despite having received repeated warnings from the College regarding his unprofessional behavior in front of and to patients, Dr. Robert Archambeault persisted in making statements and allowing staff to comment on the personal and business practices of another optometrist. Dr. Archambeault agrees to this. The panel concluded that this repeated behavior would constitute professional misconduct as detailed in paragraph 1 of the Notice of Hearing. The panel then had to determine if the evidence provided in the Agreed Statement of Facts was insufficient to make a finding of professional misconduct against Dr. B. Notwithstanding the discussion above regarding Dr. Robert Archambeault, the Agreed Statement of Facts contained only a single incident involving Dr. B. There is no evidence that was brought to the hearing that would indicate that Dr. B engaged in any repeated or ongoing behavior that involved disparaging remarks. The panel was unable to find sufficient evidence to support the allegation of professional misconduct against Dr. B as set out in paragraph 2 of the Notice of Hearing and dismissed the allegation against Dr. B. Penalty and Reasons for Penalty The panel received a Joint Submission on Penalty, which was presented by Counsel for the College. This was exhibit 3, dated February 13, 2008. There were three paragraphs presented for consideration of the panel 1, 2 and 4. Paragraph 3 was removed. They were as follows: 1. Dr. Robert Archambeault shall appear before the Discipline Committee and be reprimanded. 2. Dr. Robert Archambeault shall pay costs of the hearing in the amount of $4,000.00 to the College of Optometrists of Ontario said costs to be payable within 90 days of the date the Discipline Committee renders its decision. 3. The terms of the above penalty shall be included in the Register of the College and shall be fully accessible to the public. The panel considered the joint submission on penalty using three criteria to render its decision: 1. Does the penalty act as a mechanism to ensure public protection? 2. Does the penalty act as a specific deterrent to prevent further action on the part of the member? 3. Does the penalty act as a general deterrent to prevent other members from acting in a similar fashion? During the Joint Submissions on Penalty, the panel was presented with written testimony of Dr. Robert Archambeault’s good character from other health care professionals in the community. The panel was also informed that Dr. Archambeault has of his own volition, already written letters of apology to all of the patients involved and named in The Notice of Hearing. The panel was further informed that Dr. Archambeault is in the process of retiring from professional practice. The panel feels satisfied that cumulatively these actions act as a mechanism to ensure public protection and to prevent further action on the part of the member. The panel also believes that the penalty acts as a general deterrent to prevent other members from acting similarly in that the College of Optometrists of Ontario will not tolerate any behavior that might compromise the welfare of the patient. The panel accepted the joint submission on penalty as presented above as appropriate sanctions for this case. The hearing was adjourned. Waiver of Appeal and Administration of the Reprimand Following the hearing, Dr. Archambeault waived his right to appeal and the reprimand.
|
