Jayne Webster

The registrant, a massage therapist, admitted to professional misconduct for failing to obtain informed consent, discuss draping options, and keep accurate records.

The Tribunal found the registrant committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty.

The registrant was reprimanded, ordered to complete further education and reflection, and required to pay costs of $5,110.

The registrant pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct, including sexual and physical abuse of a client during massage therapy treatments.

The Tribunal found the registrant committed professional misconduct based on uncontested facts and a criminal conviction for assault.

The registrant resigned and undertook never to reapply for registration.

The Tribunal accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand and costs of $5,110.

In a professional discipline proceeding, the tribunal found misconduct arising from extensive recordkeeping failures and the issuance of false massage therapy receipts for treatments not provided as stated.

The evidence included hundreds of deficient client records, missing treatment notes, and text-message communications showing the creation of back-dated receipts for family members for insurance reimbursement.

Applying the joint-submission standard from Anthony-Cook, the tribunal accepted a proposed penalty consisting of a reprimand, a five-month suspension, remedial education, and compliance audits.

The tribunal also ordered costs payable in instalments.

The Tribunal found professional misconduct where the registrant treated a client's buttocks without written informed consent, failed to maintain required health and financial records, and communicated with the client through multiple media at inappropriate late-night and early-morning hours over several months.

Applying the public-interest test governing joint penalty submissions, the Tribunal accepted a joint proposal because it was not unhinged from the circumstances and would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The Tribunal emphasized client autonomy, record-keeping obligations, and the management of professional boundaries in therapeutic relationships.

A reprimand, four-month suspension, remedial educational terms, chart audits, and costs were ordered.

In a penalty decision following findings of sexual and physical abuse of a client, the Tribunal imposed a reprimand and an eight-month suspension, to commence if the registrant is ever reinstated.

The Tribunal treated the misconduct as an egregious boundary violation involving progressively intrusive touching, exposure of the client's genitals, and abuse of the therapist-client power imbalance.

A prior discipline history, including a similar sexual abuse finding, was a significant aggravating factor, and no mitigating factors were before the panel because the registrant did not attend.

The Tribunal also ordered costs of $11,704 and maintained a publication restriction protecting the client's identity.

In a professional discipline prosecution, the tribunal found that the registrant sexually and physically abused a client during a massage therapy session.

Applying the civil standard of proof and credibility principles, the tribunal accepted the client’s evidence that the registrant treated sensitive areas without written consent, used insecure draping that exposed the client’s genital area, and repeatedly touched the client’s head with his groin.

The tribunal held this conduct breached the profession’s boundaries standard, constituted sexual abuse under the Health Professions Procedural Code, violated the client’s bodily integrity, and amounted to disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct.

The allegation of breach of the client health record standard was not made out because consent to therapeutic massage treatment had been recorded.