Persley v Medical Board of Australia

[2012] QCAT 479

CITATION: Persley v Medical Board of Australia [2012] QCAT 479

PARTIES:	Dr Gary Vincent Persley
v
Medical Board of Australia

APPLICATION NUMBER: GAR190-12

MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Ms Kerrie O'Callaghan, Acting Deputy President
Assisted by:
Dr Eleanor Milligan
Dr Stephen Pozzi
Dr Ross Taylor

DELIVERED ON: 3 October 2012

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.     All conditions on the registration of Dr Persley be removed.

2.     Dr Persley pay the Medical Board’s costs of and incidental to these proceedings as agreed or as assessed on the standard basis against the District Courts scale.

CATCHWORDS:

HEALTH – PSYCHIATRIST – REVIEW – review of conditions on registration – conditions imposed by order of the Health Practitioners Tribunal – where orders imposed conditions which could only be removed by order of the Tribunal – where Registrant has complied with all conditions

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, ss 32, 248, 252, 254

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Dr Persley seeks to remove conditions imposed on his registration in 2009 following a disciplinary hearing by the Health Practitioners Tribunal. This decision is taken to be a decision of QCAT under the transitional provisions of the QCAT Act[1] and as such QCAT has jurisdiction to hear and determine the application.

   [1]        Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009, ss 248, 252 and 254.

2. In February 2009 the Health Practitioners Tribunal found that Dr Persley had engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct under the Health Practitioner (Professional Standards) Act 1999.  He had engaged in a personal relationship with a former patient.  The patient lived in Sydney and Dr Persley lived in Brisbane.  The relationship was sporadic occurring when Dr Persley went to Sydney from time to time.

3. The Health Practitioners Tribunal suspended his registration for a period of three months and conditions were placed on his registration, the substance of which were that:

   ·He was not to undertake individual psychotherapy with female patients until further order.

   ·He was to undertake counselling with a psychiatrist/counsellor, the focus of which was boundary violation.

   ·He was to engage the services of a general practitioner in relation to his general health and provide reports to the Board in this respect.

   ·The record of suspension was to remain on the Board’s register for three years.

   ·He was to authorise and consent to an exchange of information between the Medical Council of New South Wales and Medicare to facilitate compliance with the conditions.

4. Dr Persley has complied with all conditions.

5. The evidence before the Tribunal established that:

   1.He has not undertaken individual psychotherapy with females.

   2.He consulted regularly with his GP.

   3.He consulted regularly with a psychiatrist Dr Michael Martin to address boundary violations.

6. In February 2012 the Medical Council of New South Wales removed some conditions at Dr Persley’s request.

7. Two conditions remained.  Under the orders of the Health Practitioners Tribunal these remaining conditions could only be removed by the Tribunal.  The remaining conditions are conditions 1 and 3, namely:

   ·Not to undertake psychotherapy with female patients; and

   ·Dr Persley authorise the exchange of information between the Medical Council of New South Wales and Medicare.

8. Dr Persley in his affidavit gave evidence that

   1.He is currently employed as Clinical Director, Richmond Mental Health Service.

   2.The complaint and disciplinary action extending over the past four years has taught him a salutary lesson and changed the nature of his practice.

   3.He has been transparent to peers regarding the disciplinary action.

9. He also provided a reference from his employer Dr Doug Andrews in support of his application.  Dr Andrews supported the removal of the conditions and said he had no concerns about Dr Persley’s ethics or professionalism.

10. Dr Persley also produced a written report from Dr Michael Martin, the psychiatrist who had provided treatment to Dr Persley from 2009.

11. It was Dr Martin’s view that Dr Persley should now be able to practice unconditionally in the field of psychiatry.  He reported that Dr Persley had successfully undergone the required counselling about boundary violation.  He said he had confidence Dr Persley would not breach further boundaries and that his professional boundaries are now solid and he was not at risk of reoffending.  He concluded that the condition requiring Dr Persley not to conduct psychotherapy with female patients could safely be removed.

12. The Medical Board and the Medical Council of New South Wales do not oppose the removal of the remaining conditions.

13. The Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence that Dr Persley has gained insight and understanding as to the inappropriateness of the behaviour such that it is no longer necessary for him to be subject to the condition restricting psychotherapy with females.  It follows that any conditions regarding the exchange of information to facilitate compliance with the condition should also be removed.

14. Dr Persley accepts that he is responsible for payment of the Board’s standard cost.

15. The Tribunal orders:

    1.All conditions on the registration of Dr Persley be removed.

    2.Dr Persley pay the Medical Board’s costs of and incidental to these proceedings as agreed or as assessed on the standard basis against the District Courts scale.