Sherry Liang

The registrant was found to have committed professional misconduct by failing to maintain the standard of practice and engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional conduct during a prenatal appointment, specifically regarding inappropriate breast and spine examinations without informed consent.

At the penalty hearing, the Tribunal accepted a joint recommendation from the parties.

The registrant was ordered to be reprimanded, his certificate of registration was suspended for four months, and conditions were imposed requiring a practice monitor for all intimate examinations for a minimum of two years.

The registrant was also ordered to pay $26,740 in costs.

The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario alleged that the registrant committed professional misconduct by referring patients to a Pilates studio and allowing the studio to bill those services as physiotherapy under her name and registration number.

The registrant admitted to the allegations via an agreed statement of facts.

The Discipline Tribunal found that the registrant failed to maintain the standards of practice, submitted false or misleading accounts, and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional conduct.

The Tribunal accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a 15-month suspension (with 7 months remitted upon completion of remediation), practice enhancement coaching, a reprimand, and $7,000 in costs.

The registrant, a family physician, failed to respond to a patient's repeated requests to complete insurance forms and another patient's requests to forward medical records to their lawyer.

She also failed to cooperate with the College's investigation into these complaints.

Based on an agreed statement of facts, the Tribunal found the registrant engaged in professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Tribunal ordered a reprimand, a three-month suspension of her certificate of registration, specified educational and practice monitoring requirements, and $6,000 in costs.

The College of Physiotherapists of Ontario alleged that the registrant committed professional misconduct by engaging in boundary violations, including inappropriate touching and comments, and failing to obtain informed consent or provide adequate draping during treatment.

The registrant admitted to the allegations in an agreed statement of facts.

The Tribunal found the registrant committed professional misconduct and accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, a suspension of up to five months, remedial training, and $3,500 in costs.

A discipline panel found professional misconduct where a registrant delayed until the next day making a mandatory report to a children’s aid society after receiving disclosures giving reasonable grounds to suspect child sexual abuse and a caregiver’s failure to protect.

The panel held that the immediate reporting duty under s. 125(1) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 was engaged and that the delay breached both the profession’s standard of practice and the misconduct regulation.

Applying the public-interest test governing joint submissions, the panel accepted an agreed penalty of a two-month suspension with a possible one-month remission tied to remediation, together with a reprimand and training terms.

The panel also accepted the joint costs submission of $4,700.

The College alleged that the registrant engaged in professional misconduct by submitting improper claims under the Interim Federal Health Program and failing to maintain adequate clinical records.

The registrant admitted to the misconduct, acknowledging that she billed for services provided by interns and double-booked patients.

The Tribunal found that the registrant's actions constituted professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Tribunal ordered a reprimand, a four-month suspension (with a possible two-month remission), and specified terms, conditions, and limitations on her certificate of registration, along with $4,700 in costs.

The College of Massage Therapists of Ontario alleged that the registrant committed professional misconduct by sexually abusing a patient, falsifying an academic record, and breaching professional boundaries.

The registrant, who was also the patient's massage therapy instructor, admitted to the allegations in an Agreed Statement of Facts.

The Discipline Tribunal found the registrant committed professional misconduct.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Tribunal ordered the mandatory revocation of the registrant's certificate of registration, a public reprimand, reimbursement of up to $17,940 for patient therapy funding, and $5,110 in costs.

The College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario alleged that the registrant, a speech-language pathologist working as a care co-ordinator, engaged in professional misconduct.

The parties proceeded on an agreed statement of facts, admitting that the registrant failed to maintain standards of practice, did not adequately document her findings, and failed to obtain informed consent.

The Discipline Tribunal found the registrant committed professional misconduct.

The Tribunal accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a two-month suspension, a reprimand, completion of a course on informed consent, a mentorship program, and $2,000 in costs.

The College alleged that the registrant physician sexually abused a female patient and failed to maintain the standard of practice during a prenatal appointment.

The Tribunal found that the registrant's examination of the patient's breasts through her clothing and his persistence in examining her spine despite her objections failed to meet the standard of practice.

The Tribunal also found that the substandard breast exam, performed without adequate consent, constituted disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional conduct.

However, the Tribunal concluded that the College did not prove the allegations of sexual abuse, as the breast touching was not of a sexual nature and the evidence regarding genital touching was insufficiently reliable.

The College alleged that the registrant engaged in professional misconduct based on findings by the Collège des médecins du Québec (CMQ).

The Quebec Tribunal found the registrant committed misconduct by advertising and paying for egg donations in contravention of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act, and by making disparaging remarks about a colleague.

The Ontario Physicians and Surgeons Discipline Tribunal found that the registrant's actions constituted professional misconduct in Ontario.

Accepting a joint submission, the Tribunal ordered a reprimand, a two-month suspension, ethics training, and costs of $6,000.

In a professional discipline hearing, the College alleged that the registrant facilitated cheating on a licensing multiple-choice examination conducted through her spouse's private exam-preparation business and later obstructed the ensuing investigation by deleting electronic files and discouraging a student from cooperating.

The Tribunal held that the evidence proved the registrant performed bookkeeping and limited administrative assistance for the business, but did not prove she participated in teaching the examination-preparation course or knew of any solicitation and redistribution of actual examination questions.

The Tribunal also found the circumstantial evidence regarding deletion of cloud-based files was equally consistent with the spouse having performed the deletions, and it rejected the only direct inculpatory evidence because the student witness was not sufficiently credible or reliable.

The request for an adverse inference from the failure to call the spouse was declined.

No finding of professional misconduct was made.

In a professional discipline proceeding, the Tribunal found that the registrant sexually abused and physically abused a client during a massage therapy session, contravened the College’s sexual-abuse prevention standard, and engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct.

The findings were based on a signed statement of uncontested facts in which the registrant pleaded no contest to the allegations.

Applying the public-interest test for joint submissions, the Tribunal accepted the parties’ joint penalty submission.

It ordered a reprimand, mandatory revocation, reimbursement for therapy or counselling funding provided under s. 85.7 of the Health Professions Procedural Code, security of $6,000, and costs of $5,852.

The registrant, a chiropodist, faced allegations of professional misconduct for failing to properly supervise students, permitting them to treat patients and dispense orthotics contrary to College standards, and submitting inaccurate documentation to an insurance company.

The matter proceeded on an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty.

The Tribunal found the registrant engaged in professional misconduct and ordered a reprimand, a seven-month suspension (with two months remitted upon completion of remedial work), practice restrictions, supervision, and $20,000 in costs.

A discipline panel found professional misconduct where the registrant practised psychotherapy while his certificate of registration was suspended for non-payment of fees, used restricted titles during suspension, issued invoices containing false information, and continued online advertising that held him out as a psychotherapist.

The panel held that this conduct contravened the profession’s standards of practice, the title restrictions in the governing statute, and specific misconduct provisions addressing practising and benefiting while suspended.

Applying the Anthony-Cook framework to the parties’ joint submission, the panel concluded that the proposed sanction was not contrary to the public interest.

The panel imposed a two-month suspension, a reprimand, specified remedial study requirements, and costs of $4,700 payable over 24 months.

In a professional discipline penalty decision, the tribunal addressed misconduct arising solely from the registrant’s failure to retain a client health record for the required period.

After earlier dismissing sexual abuse, physical abuse, and standards allegations, the tribunal accepted a joint submission imposing a reprimand and, if the registrant returns to practice, a requirement to complete the College’s record-keeping e-workshop.

The tribunal held the proposed sanction met public protection, deterrence, remediation, and public interest objectives.

No costs were ordered, given the admission on the record-keeping issue and the dismissal of the more serious allegations that consumed most of the hearing.

The College of Chiropodists of Ontario alleged that the registrant committed professional misconduct by participating in an arrangement where patients received free shoes if they purchased orthotics.

The registrant admitted to failing to perform complete assessments, using improper casting techniques, and submitting false or misleading records to an insurance company.

Proceeding on an Agreed Statement of Facts and Joint Submission on Penalty, the Discipline Tribunal found the misconduct proven.

The Tribunal accepted the joint submission and ordered a reprimand, a 10-month suspension, practice restrictions, and $10,000 in costs.

In a professional discipline proceeding, the tribunal found that the registrant sexually abused a client during a massage therapy appointment by engaging in touching and behaviour of a sexual nature that was not clinically appropriate and occurred without consent.

The tribunal also found contraventions of published standards respecting professional boundaries, sexual abuse prevention, consent, and client health records, as well as physical abuse, record-keeping failures, and disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct under the governing regulation and Code.

Applying the Anthony-Cook public-interest standard for joint submissions, the tribunal accepted the proposed penalty.

Mandatory revocation and reprimand were ordered, together with reimbursement of therapy funding and costs.

The Discipline Committee determined the penalty and costs following a finding that the registrant committed professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with an investigation and retweeting a transphobic statement.

Balancing the registrant's Charter right to freedom of expression with the College's statutory objectives, the Committee ordered a reprimand, a six-month suspension, and remedial education.

The Committee declined to revoke the registrant's certificate, finding the suspension proportionate.

The Committee also ordered the registrant to pay $25,157.80 in costs, representing two-thirds of the College's actual costs.

The Discipline Committee held a penalty and costs hearing following a finding of professional misconduct against an audiologist who failed to communicate with a client, resulting in delayed treatment.

The registrant did not attend the hearing.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, a nine-month suspension (with three months suspended if remediation is completed within six months), and terms on her certificate.

The Committee also ordered the registrant to pay $43,716.73 in costs, representing two-thirds of the College's actual costs, noting her ungovernability and use of OPCA tactics.

The College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario alleged that the registrant engaged in professional misconduct by failing to cooperate with an investigation and by making an inappropriate and offensive social media post.

The Discipline Committee found that the registrant refused entry to a College investigator and ignored repeated requests for an interview, violating her mandatory duties under the Health Professions Procedural Code.

Furthermore, the Committee found that the registrant's retweet of a transphobic post was disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional.

In reaching this conclusion, the Committee balanced the registrant's Charter right to freedom of expression against the College's statutory objective of maintaining the integrity of the profession, finding the restriction proportionate.

The allegations of professional misconduct were proven.