Judith Welikovitch

In a professional discipline hearing, the registrant admitted falsifying dental records and backdating insurance-related documents for multiple patients so they could maximize year-end benefits.

The panel found professional misconduct proven under s. 51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code and paragraphs 26, 28, 33, and 59 of s. 2 of Ontario Regulation 853/93.

Applying the public-interest test governing joint submissions on penalty, the panel accepted a joint penalty and costs submission.

The order imposed a five-month suspension, remedial coursework, 24 months of practice monitoring, a prohibition on employing the registrant’s wife in the practice, and $10,000 in costs.

In a professional discipline hearing, the panel found a dentist guilty of professional misconduct for practising at a clinic owned and operated by a non-member, thereby creating prohibited conflicts of interest and impermissible fee sharing.

The registrant also failed to advise the regulator of all practice locations, and the panel held that the cumulative conduct was disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional or unethical, although one unadmitted particular alleging treatment planning with the non-member was not proven.

Applying the public-interest test governing joint penalty submissions, the panel accepted a joint submission imposing a reprimand, a four-month suspension, remedial education, practice monitoring, reporting obligations, and costs.

The decision emphasizes public protection, specific and general deterrence, and remediation in professional discipline.