Charge
On 28 February 2022 the Health Practitioner’s Disciplinary Tribunal heard a charge laid by a Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) appointed by the Medical Council of New Zealand against Christopher Bevan Paltridge, registered medical practitioner of Auckland (the doctor).
The charge related to 7 patients and is summarised below:
Treating and prescribing medications to patient Mr [E]
- April 2014
- Failed to record and/or maintain adequate notes of consultation and/or blood test results;
- Failed to adequately assess the patient’s condition;
- August 2016 to December 2016
- Failed to record and/or maintain adequate notes;
- Offered, prescribed and/or dispensed prescription medications, including those of potential abuse where there was no clinical indication for their use;
- Failed to adequately assess the patient’s condition prior to prescribing him the medications;
- Failed to adequately monitor the patient’s use of the medications;
- Failed to advise the patient of the potential side effects of the medications;
- Failed to consider or take reasonable steps to ascertain whether the patient was seeking the medications of potential abuse for non-therapeutic purposes.
- 20 October to 26 October 2016
- Imported prescription medication in the name of the patient when the medication was not intended for the patient.
- October 2016 to December 2016
- Continued to prescribe medications to the patient including those of potential abuse when he had been warned by the patient’s general practitioner that the patient was seeking medications for non-therapeutic purposes.
- 28 February 2011 to 12 September 2016 – Importing prescription medicines
- Imported or directed others to import prescription medicines without reasonable excuse where the named patients were not under his care and did not receive the medications.
- Treating and prescribing medications to six patients
- October 2012 and January 2017 prescribed medications including those of potential abuse to six patients in a manner which departed from the accepted standard of prescribing and medical practices of a general practitioner.
Offered prescribed and dispensed medications including those of potential abuse where there was no clinical reason for doing so and without appropriate assessment or adequate follow-up or monitoring.
Failed to take adequate notes.
- Mr G – February 2015 to January 2017
- Mr N – February 2016 to January 2017
- Mr H – October 2012 to January 2017
- Mr I – August 2013 to January 2017
- Mr S – April 2016 to January 2017
- Mr L – July 2015 to January 2017
The conduct was in breach of the Medicines Act 1981, the Medicines Regulations 1984, the Health (Retention of Health Information) Regulations 1996, ethical obligations and accepted standards of practice.
The conduct alleged amounted to professional misconduct in that it either separately or cumulative amounts to malpractice or negligence in relation to his scope of practice and/or has brought or likely to bring discredit to the profession.
The doctor accepted the charge and that the conduct therein amounted to professional misconduct. The hearing proceeded on the basis of an agreed summary of facts.
Background
The doctor worked at the New Zealand Men’s Clinic in Auckland as a director and medical practitioner for over 15 years until 31 March 2017.
In 2011, the doctor was found guilty of professional misconduct for prescribing hormones to treat patients with symptoms of menopause without having consulted with and/or examined those patients; failing to verify or ensuring that the clinic nurse verified patient’s medical and family history and clinical details, before prescribing hormones to treat symptoms of menopause; making false and/or misleading statements in NZ Herald advertisements; and providing misleading information on the NZ Men’s Clinic website. The doctor was censured and recommendations were made that the Medical Council rehabilitate him by way of educational programmes.
The Medical Council (the Council) received a notification in December 2016 from the sister of patient E, who was concerned about the care her brother was receiving. A further notification from the Accident Compensation Corporation was received in February 2017 about the doctor’s prescribing to the patient. A PCC investigation took place and a charge, as set out above, was laid with the Tribunal. In the meantime, the Council placed conditions on the doctor’s practice preventing him from importing, prescribing, dispensing or treating patients with medications the subject of the charge.
Finding
The Tribunal found the charge established and sufficiently serious to warrant disciplinary. Particulars 6 to 12 were found to amount to negligence, malpractice and conduct likely to bring discredit to the profession. sanction.
Particular 1 amounted to negligence and conduct that did not meet the standards set by the Council. It was not a case of mere oversight or inadvertence.
Particular 2 amounted to negligence and conduct likely to bring discredit to the profession. The doctor did not have the patient’s wellbeing as his paramount concern.
Particular 3 amounted to malpractice and likely to bring discredit to the profession. The doctor manipulated the system that enables the importation of medication for patients who need it.
Particular 4 amounted to negligence and conduct likely to bring discredit to the profession.
Particular 5 amounted to malpractice and conduct likely to bring discredit to the medical profession. The conduct was clearly unethical.
Penalty
The Tribunal ordered:
- Censure;
- Suspension for six months to commence 14 days from the date of the decision;
- A fine of $5,000.
- Conditions on practice for a period of three years after recommencing practice;
- A contribution towards the costs of the PCC and the Tribunal amount to $35,000, 54% of the total costs.
The Tribunal directed publication of the decision and a summary.