Return
File Number: Med13/243D
Practitioner: Manilall Maharajh
Hearing Start Date:Hearing End Date:
Hearing Town/City:
Hearing Location:
Charge Characteristics:
Professional boundaries breached (Established)
Sexual misconduct - sexual relationship with patient or former patient or partner of patient (Established)
Prescribing - inappropriate/inadequate (Established)
Lied/misled - attempted to involve others to authority (Established)
Confidentiality - breach of (Established)
Additional Orders:
Name Suppression to Complainant and/or Patient and/or client
Complainant and family granted permanent name suppression by order of consent
539Med13243D.pdf
Name Suppression to Practitioner
Practitioner granted interim name suppression by order of consent
538Med13243D.pdf
Name Suppression to Practitioner
Practitioner declined permanent name suppression
581Med13243D.pdf
Other Suppression Orders
Practitioners wife granted permanent suppression of christian name
581Med13243D.pdf
Other
Admissibility of Evidence
563Med13243d.pdf
Precis of Decision: Charge
On 12-16 August 2013, the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (the Tribunal) considered a charge laid by the Director of Proceedings against Dr Manilall Maharajh (the Doctor), medical practitioner formerly of Tauranga, now of Australia. The Doctor was the patient's psychiatrist.
The charge alleged the Doctor was guilty of professional misconduct in that he:
- entered into an inappropriate and/or sexual relationship with a vulnerable patient;
- prescribed Fluoxetine to the patient without adequate clinical justification;
- discharged the patient by telephone on 18 August 2008, which was an inadequate discharge given the patient's personality characteristics and vulnerabilities;
- continued the sexual relationship after the clinical relationship ended;
- interfered with the legal process by attempting to improperly influence and procure the withdrawal of complaints to the Health and Disability Commissioner.
Finding
The Tribunal considered that there was adequate clinical justification to prescribe Fluoxetine but it found all the other elements of the charge established.
The Tribunal was satisfied that there had been multiple and severe breaches of standards over a long period of time which were very significant. The Tribunal considered the manner in which the Doctor took advantage of a young, vulnerable and sexually inexperienced woman for his own sexual gratification was complete abrogation of his professional responsibliities as a psychiatrist and of the trust inherent in the professional relationship.
The charge of professional misconduct was made out.
Penalty
The Tribunal ordered that the Doctor's registration be cancelled.
He was censured and ordered to pay costs of $73,000.00.