Consent critical, Levin sex trial told
Patients say touching not discussed
All doctors, including psychiatrists, should get consent for procedures they perform on patients and document both the consent and details of the procedure, a high-ranking health official testified at the Dr. Aubrey Levin sexual assault trial on Tuesday.
“In general, obtaining consent is engaging in dialogue or discussions regarding risks of certain procedures,” said Dr. Francois Belanger, a pediatric emergency physician and vice-president of the Calgary Zone for Alberta Health Services.
“The general sense is proficiency in quality care and patient safety. Once you’ve obtained consent, make sure you’ve documented that you obtained consent.”
Many of the 10 complainants have alleged they did not consent to Levin, a former forensic psychiatrist, touching or fondling their genitals during primarily court-ordered sessions between 1999 and 2010. They say Levin did not discuss such procedures or actions ahead of time and did not obtain consent.
As well, they testified, the doctor did not wash his hands before or wear protective rubber gloves during the procedures.
Levin has denied sexually assaulting the men.
He told police in an interview after his arrest, played in court earlier in trial, that he was assisting the patients with sexual dysfunction and/ or erectile dysfunction.
As well, he told police he performed the procedure because it takes many months to get a urologist to do it, and many of the patients he had through the court system did not have family doctors.
Under cross-examination, Belanger told defence lawyer Karen Molle that all doctors would have a working knowledge of how to deal with sexual dysfunctions or sexually transmitted diseases, but that psychiatrists would likely refer such patients to a specialist as opposed to doing it themselves. “Typically not,” he said. “A family physician or urologist would deal with it.
“But the psychiatrist may come into play.
“They may discuss and treat mental health issues, but I don’t think psychiatrists would do a physical examination on a regular basis.”
The initial complainant, R.B., twice taped sessions with Levin using a Spy Watch video camera in March 2010.
The videos showed the doctor fondling his genitals — the last time for nearly 15 minutes.
Under continued cross-examination, R.B. repeatedly denied he edited any of the videos on his Spy Watch camera.
He also said he never discussed being sexually assaulted as he did not know any of the other alleged victims.
In heated accusations of editing videos and discussing the alleged assault and video with women following a March 16, 2010, session, R.B. became frustrated.
“This guy has ruined my life for 10 years,” he said, alluding to his first visit with Levin back in 2002. “It’s like (you’re saying) he didn’t assault me.
“It’s what he put the victims through.
“I was court-ordered to go to him. If I didn’t go, I would be in jail for 18 months.”
The trial before Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Donna Shelley and jury continues.