Margaret Dunn

In a professional discipline hearing, the member admitted misconduct arising from failure to refund a $1,600 deposit for dental treatment never performed, delay in producing patient records, breach of a prior discipline order, and failure to respond appropriately to the regulator’s inquiries.

The panel accepted the admissions and the agreed statement of facts, but made no finding on the allegation that the member was ungovernable.

The panel accepted a joint submission focused on remediation and public protection, emphasizing the absence of patient-care concerns, the member’s psychiatric treatment, mentoring, and monitoring history.

The member was reprimanded, made subject to detailed ongoing treatment, mentoring, and monitoring conditions, and ordered to pay $12,500 in costs.

In a professional discipline hearing, the panel accepted the member’s admissions to multiple misconduct allegations involving deficient recordkeeping, excessive or unreasonable fees, false or misleading insurance accounts, and failure to collect patient co-payments.

The misconduct arose from treatment and billing practices across multiple dental offices over several years, including inaccurate charting, missing documentation, incorrect billing codes, claims using treatment dates that did not match actual service dates, and routine write-offs of co-payments.

The panel found the admitted facts substantiated professional misconduct under the governing health-professions regime and accepted a joint penalty submission notwithstanding concern about the member’s prior similar discipline history.

The penalty included a reprimand, a four-month suspension, remedial education, practice monitoring, suspension-related restrictions, and $5,000 in costs.

In a professional discipline hearing, the member admitted billing a publicly funded children's dental program for restorative treatments on two minor patients that were not completed, and admitted related recordkeeping and billing misconduct.

The panel found professional misconduct under s.51(1)(c) of the Health Professions Procedural Code and paragraphs 31, 33, and 59 of s. 2 of Ontario Regulation 853.

Accepting a joint submission, the panel imposed a reprimand, a four-month suspension, educational remediation, practice monitoring, and costs.

The panel held that the sanction met the goals of deterrence, rehabilitation, and public protection, while recognizing cooperation, remorse, and restitution.

A discipline panel found a dentist guilty of professional misconduct for describing himself on his website as a specialist in orthodontics and as a specialist orthodontist while registered only as a general dentist.

The panel held that the member was responsible for misleading advertising published on his website even if the web provider made the error, and found the conduct unprofessional and unethical, particularly in light of a prior undertaking arising from similar conduct.

The panel imposed a reprimand, a six-week suspension, ethics remediation, and advance approval conditions for promotional materials.

The panel also ordered costs of $15,000 payable to the College.

Discipline proceeding arising from a complaint and investigation concerning a dentist’s long-term treatment of four members of the same family.

The panel accepted a guilty plea and agreed statement of facts establishing supervised neglect, failures in diagnosis and treatment, inadequate recordkeeping, absence of documented informed consent, and improper lorazepam prescribing for one patient.

The panel found professional misconduct on all allegations except one disputed particular under the prescribing allegation.

On penalty, the panel accepted a joint submission after the member voluntarily undertook to permanently resign, and ordered a reprimand and $5,000 in costs.