Doctor did exams for his sexual gratification, panel told
No valid medical reason for intimate checkups, college’s counsel says
Dr. Stanley Bo-Shui Chung conducted unnecessary breast and pelvic exams on young female patients for his own sexual gratification, counsel for the College of Physicians and Surgeons argued Friday.
“These patients submitted themselves to intimate, invasive and uncomfortable examinations because they trusted that he was conducting them for a valid medical reason,” said Alice Cranker, counsel for the college. “He was not.” Chung has pleaded not guilty to charges of sexual abuse and sexual impropriety related to “gratuitous” breast, pelvic and rectal examinations of 19 female patients, including girls as young as 12.
The charges are not criminal but could result in Chung losing his medical licence. The former family physician retired last June.
In her closing arguments, Cranker dismissed Chung’s defence that he believed frequent breast and pelvic examinations were components of normal physical checkups.
The college warned him in 2002 to perform fewer internal examinations and to stop combining them with breast examinations, but patient records show he continued in some cases.
Dr. Kimberly Wintemute, the college’s expert witness, reviewed patient records from the early1980s to 2011 and found a “staggering” number of examinations performed without a valid medical reason.
“The only inference to be made is that the examinations were conducted with sexual intent,” said Cranker.
But Chung’s lawyer firmly dismissed this claim, arguing the col- lege had “no evidence whatsoever” of sexual abuse.
Anne Spafford pointed out that none of the patients had alleged Chung kissed, fondled, hugged or made sexual remarks toward them, suggesting he did not have sexual motivations.
She also questioned Wintemute’s expertise as she did not research the standard of care before she began practising in 1995. Chung’s alleged unnecessary examinations began in the early 1980s. Spafford added that only four of the 19 patients had appeared before the panel. One patient returned to see Chung four times after she said she first became suspicious and waited more than 20 years to come forward with allegations of abuse. “You have not heard any clear or credible evidence of sexual abuse,” Spafford told the review panel Friday. “You cannot find Dr. Chung guilty of sexual touching without that evidence.” The panel will submit its decision in a written statement at a later date.