Committee: Discipline
Decision Date: 14 Jul 2016
Summary:
On July 14, 2016, the Discipline Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario found that Anthony Richard Eldon Laws committed an act of professional misconduct in that he engaged in sexual abuse of a patient; failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession; and engaged in conduct or an act or omission relevant to the practice of medicine that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional.
Dr. Laws was a general practitioner with a practice in Hamilton from 1986 until his certificate of registration expired in April 2015 when he resigned. He focused on treating patients with attention deficit disorder (“ADD”).
Patient A
Patient A, then in his mid-30s, was Dr. Laws’ private practice patient from about March 2012 to June 2014. Dr. Laws treated Patient A for ADD and prescribed him stimulant medications.
Dr. Laws, on several occasions, invited Patient A to Dr. Laws’ home office. Patient A and Dr. Laws did not spend any time in his home office; rather, Patient A would go to Dr. Laws’ house and “hang out,” drinking alcohol and using Dr. Laws’ hot tub together.
On one of these occasions at Dr. Laws’ home, Dr. Laws kissed Patient A.
On another occasion at Dr. Laws’ home, Dr. Laws gave a massage to Patient A while they were both naked. During the massage, Dr. Laws put Patient A’s penis in his mouth.
Patient A slept at Dr. Laws’ house two or three times because he had been drinking alcohol and did not want to drive home. Patient A told the College that “there isn’t really a clear boundary between friend and doctor and it’s always been kind of frustrating to me.”
Patient A and Dr. Laws also exchanged numerous emails about both social and medical issues while their doctor-patient relationship existed.
On one occasion at Dr. Laws’ house, during the time that Dr. Laws was prescribing stimulant medication to Patient A, Dr. Laws provided Patient A with a marijuana cookie, which Patient A ate. This led to Patient A experiencing psychotic symptoms and ultimately his admission to the Emergency Room of the local hospital.
The College retained a psychiatrist to provide his opinion on the care and treatment Dr. Laws provided to Patient A. This expert opined that Dr. Laws fell short of the standard of practice of the profession in his use of excessive doses of stimulants for ADD with poor documentation and without appropriate careful follow up. His giving this patient an illicit street drug is also reprehensible and immoral and put a patient with mental illness already on medications, at risk of destabilization – all of this falling short of the standards of the profession.
Patient B
Patient B, then in his early 30s, was Dr. Laws’ private practice patient from about May 2003 to at least August 2010. Dr. Laws treated Patient B for ADD.
In 2004, Patient B became Dr. Laws’ tenant in 2004, while they had a doctor-patient relationship. Patient B rented a room in Dr. Laws’ house for $450/month and Patient B would assist in the yard and house maintenance as required. This arrangement lasted for several years.
While Patient B was his patient and tenant, Dr. Laws completed a medical document regarding Patient B’s ability to participate in employment-related activities, in support of Patient B’s receipt of social assistance.
While Patient B was his patient and tenant, Dr. Laws and Patient B also opened a joint bank account. Patient B’s social assistance payments were deposited directly into their joint account.
Dr. Laws also prescribed narcotics to Patient B during their doctor-patient and landlord-tenant relationships.
Although Dr. Laws told College that Patient B ceased being his tenant in 2009 or 2010, he did hire Patient B to work on his property at later dates.
The College retained another psychiatrist to provide his opinion on the care and treatment Dr. Laws provided to Patient B. This expert opined, among other things that Dr. Laws did not demonstrate insight or acknowledgement with regards to the boundary issues, nor did he express any sense of responsibility with regards to his role in this doctor-patient relationship. Dr. Laws also did not provide an adequate explanation regarding his prescription of opiates to [Patient B], and did not mention the use of these drugs in subsequent reports to other physicians.
ORDER
On July 14, 2016, the Discipline Committee ordered and directed that:
- The Registrar revoke Dr. Laws’ certificate of registration effective immediately.
- Dr. Laws to reimburse the College for funding provided to patients under the program required under section 85.7 of the Code, by posting an irrevocable letter of credit or other security acceptable to the College, by August 15, 2016, in the amount of $16,060.00.
- Dr. Laws appear before the panel to be reprimanded.
- Dr. Laws pay costs to the College in the amount of $5,000.00 by August 15, 2016.
Committee: Discipline
Decision Date: 29 Jun 1999
Summary:
In December 1998 the Discipline Committee accepted Dr. Laws plea of guilty to professional misconduct and found him guilty of professional misconduct in that he signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he k new or ought to have known was false and misleading as defined in clause 1(1)33 of the Ontario Regulation 856/93. Subsequently, the Committee ordered the following:
1) A reprimand with the fact of the reprimand to be recorded on the Register;
2) Dr. Laws certificate of registration is to be suspended for six (6) months commencing within sixty (60) days of this order becoming final, on a date to be fixed by the Registrar;
3) Three (3) months of the suspension referred to in paragraph 2 to be suspended provided that within twelve (12) months, Dr. Laws satisfies the following conditions:
a) Dr. Laws undergoes a course of treatment under the care of a psychiatrist acceptable to the Registrar, involving a session at least every two (2) months, for a period of twelve (12) months, and thereafter as a psychiatrist recommends;
b) the psychiatrist providing care to Dr. Laws will report on Dr. Laws progress to the Registrar at the conclusion of the sixth month, and at the conclusion of the twelfth month and will provide to the Registrar his or her recommendation of further care and reporting, which is to be complied with by Dr. Laws;
c) Dr. Laws undergoes a course of treatment in management of his Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), with Dr. FG, or another physician acceptable to the Registrar, for a period of at least twelve (12) months and proof of the fact of such treatment shall be provided to the Registrar;
d) Dr. Laws will complete a course in medical ethics and the Medical Records keeping Course for Physicians provided by the CPSO or a similar course that is satisfactory to the Registrar.
e) Any costs associated with any of the above requirements will be at the expense of Dr. Laws.
4) Failure to comply with the above terms in the opinion of the Registrar, subject to review by the Discipline Committee, will result in resumption of the suspension of Dr. Laws until such terms and conditions are met or until the completion of the balance of the six months suspension imposed under paragraph 2, whichever comes first.