MD loses licence over sex abuse
Leaside physician also ordered to pay $16,000 to cover therapy for patient
A Toronto physician who was found to have stroked a patient’s buttocks, routinely hugged and kissed her and once said she would be a “good lover” has lost his licence.
A discipline panel of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario ordered this month that Dr. William (Art) Beairsto, who practised family medicine and psychotherapy in Leaside, should not only have his licence revoked for sexual abuse, but also post credit in the amount of $16,000 to cover therapy costs for the patient, known as Patient A.
The college will not confirm if it referred the case to the police, only that it complied with its policy on “reporting physicians’ acts to the police.”
The October 2015 policy states that the college will forward a copy of its discipline decision to police in “any matter that raises issues of physician criminal actions.”
The college said it is barred by law from providing a patient’s name to police unless the patient consents.
The case again highlights that there is no provision in law that makes it mandatory for all health professional colleges to report complaints about members to the police, something that has divided lawyers and advocates.
Toronto police said that Beairsto is not facing criminal charges.
The 69-year-old physician was found guilty of sexual abuse by a panel of the college’s discipline committee in August 2016 and had been suspended since November. His lawyer declined to comment to the Star.
Since the passage of Bill 87 in May, it is mandatory that a physician found guilty of groping be immediately suspended pending the outcome of their penalty hearing, where their licence must now be revoked.
Beairsto’s lawyers had argued at his penalty hearing in March that the amendments to the Regulated Health Professions Act brought in by Bill 87 should not apply because his case came before the passage of the bill. They argued to extend his suspension by three months, coupled with further training and supervi- sion. Before Bill 87, a discipline panel still had the discretion to impose penalties when it came to groping. Indeed, the panel was harshly criticized as recently as 2016 for handing down suspensions for groping, rather than revoking licences.
But the four-member panel in the Beairsto case agreed with the college’s lawyer that the provisions in Bill 87 were retroactive and that the doctor should lose his licence. Even if not for Bill 87, the panel said they would still have revoked his licence.
“Counsel for Dr. Beairsto argued that the legislative changes should not be applied retrospectively because the imposition of mandatory revocation would be punitive, and that different strategic decisions with respect to his defence might have been made had they known that mandatory revocation was a possi- bility,” the panel wrote.
The panel noted Beairsto had previously come under the college’s radar in 2010 for a complaint of “egregious boundary crossings/violations” with a patient. That complaint was never sent to a public discipline hearing. Instead, Beairsto was cautioned in secret, ordered to participate in a psychotherapy support group and stop seeing patients with certain significant personality disorders, among other things.
The issue of whether sexual abuse by physicians should always be reported by the colleges to the police has been the subject of debate.
An independent task force, set up in the wake of a Star investigation on doctors still at work after sexually abusing their patients, specifically recommended against a mandatory reporting rule in its final report to Health Minister Eric Hoskins. Some of the task force’s recommendations formed part of Bill 87.
“Understandably, we all wish for a simple solution to a complex problem,” wrote chair Marilou McPhedran, a senator, and Sheila Macdonald, provincial co-ordinator of Ontario sex assault and domestic violence treatment centres.
“The task force notes patients who have experienced sexual abuse by a health professional . . . should continue to have, the option to report the abuse to the police and proceed through the criminal justice system process, should they so choose.
“However, the task force asserts that choice is essential for patients who have experienced abuse and that the patient must retain agency and control as the decision-maker in these situations.”