DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Blanchard, 2012 ONOCT 4
Date: 2012-08-08
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Catherine Melissa Blanchard, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Mel Greif
Irene Dembek, OCT Monika Ferenczy, OCT
BETWEEN: ) Eli Mogil
) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Bev Hodsdon,
) Law Clerk
- and – )
CATHERINE MELISSA BLANCHARD ) Simon Blackstone,
(CERTIFICATE #446190) ) Ursel Phillips Fellows
) Hopkinson LLP,
) for Catherine Melissa Blanchard
) Julie Maciura,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: August 8, 2012
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on August 8, 2012 at the Ontario College of Teachers (“the College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing, dated November 4, 2011 was served on Catherine Melissa Blanchard, requesting her presence on November 24, 2011 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for August 8, 2012.
Catherine Melissa Blanchard was in attendance at the hearing.
The allegations against Catherine Melissa Blanchard in the Notice of Hearing, (Exhibit 1) dated November 4, 2011 are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Catherine Melissa Blanchard is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in subsection 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), in that:
(a) she failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) she abused a student or students verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
(c) she abused a student or students physically, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.1);
(d) she abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(e) she failed to comply with the Act and the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1)(c) thereof or the Regulations made under those Acts, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(f) she committed acts that having regard to all the circumstances would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18); and
(g) she engaged in conduct unbecoming a Member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
At the hearing on August 8, 2012, College counsel sought to withdraw the allegation of professional misconduct in paragraph (d) in the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member breached Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2). The Committee agrees that this allegation shall be withdrawn.
Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced a Statement of Uncontested Facts, and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 2), which provides as follows:
STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS
Catherine Melissa Blanchard (the “Member”) was at all material times, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information respecting the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) as a teacher at East York Collegiate (the “School”) in Toronto, Ontario.
At all material times, Student A and Student B were students at the School.
On or around March 24, 2010, Student A threw a pop can into the garbage can instead of the recycling bin.
The Member approached Student A, and repeatedly told him to go get the can and put it in the recycling container. The student walked away from the Member. The Member grabbed hold of Student A’s hooded sweatshirt. Student A pulled away from the Member, and complained that his shirt was ripping.
During this time, Student B and several other students were around the Member and Student A. Student B pulled out his cell phone because he was going to record the incident between the Member and Student A, but he did not do so.
The Member repeatedly told Student B to put away the cell phone, and then attempted to grab Student B’s cell phone. Student B then began to back away from the Member. The Member followed Student B, who was blocking her access to her classroom. The Member placed her hand on his shoulder. Student B lost his balance and fell to the ground.
The Member then closed and locked the door to her classroom to prevent students in the hallway from entering the classroom.
Student A attempted to enter the Member’s classroom. The Member pushed Student A out of her classroom saying words to the effect, “Shut up and get the fuck out”.
The Member received a fifteen (15) day suspension by the Board.
PLEA OF NO CONTEST
By this document, the Member admits, for the purposes of this proceeding only, the truth of the facts and the exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 10 above (the “Uncontested Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Uncontested Facts referred to in paragraphs 5 to 9 above, constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, and pleads no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against her, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.1), 1(15), 1(18) – unprofessional) and 1(19).
By this document the Member states that:
(a) she understands fully the nature of the allegations against her;
(b) she understands that by signing this document he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Uncontested Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) she understands that by pleading no contest to the allegations, she is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against her and the right to have a hearing;
(d) she understands that depending on the penalty ordered by the Discipline Committee, the decision of the Committee and a summary of its reasons, including reference to her name, may be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) she understands that any agreement between counsel for the College and herself with respect to the penalty proposed in this document does not bind the Discipline Committee;
(f) she understands and acknowledges that she is executing this Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel.
The Member provides this plea of no contest pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter E. 23, for the purpose of this proceeding under the Ontario College of Teachers Act 1996, chapter 12, and for no other purpose. The Member’s plea of no contest does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.
In light of the uncontested facts and circumstances, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
- The Ontario College of Teachers and the Member jointly submit that the appropriate penalty to be imposed by the Discipline Committee in this matter would be that the Committee:
(a) directs that the Member appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”);
(b) directs the Registrar to impose the following terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such terms, conditions, or limitations to be recorded on the Register until such time as they are fulfilled:
(i) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding appropriate boundaries and boundary violation issues and anger management;
(ii) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the courses outlined in (i) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the course provider stating that:
A. he or she has reviewed a copy of the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest and Joint Submission on Penalty document made an exhibit at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and
B. the Member has successfully completed the course.
(c) directs that there be publication of the findings and Order of the Committee in summary form, in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. The parties have not agreed on whether or not the Member’s name should be included and submissions will be made on that issue.
DECISION Having considered the evidence, onus and standard of proof, and the submissions made by Counsel for the College and Counsel for the Member, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that Catherine Melissa Blanchard committed acts of professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.1), 1(15), 1(18 - unprofessional) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 10 (the “uncontested facts”) of the Statement of Uncontested Facts, and Plea of No Contest, and Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 2). She acknowledged that the uncontested facts referred to in paragraphs 5 to 9 above constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and pleaded no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct.
The Committee accepted the Member’s plea of no contest and the facts in the Statement of Uncontested Facts, and Plea of No Contest. The Committee finds that on or about March 24, 2010, the Member grabbed hold of a student by his hooded sweatshirt and used intemperate language when the student ignored her reasonable request. She also placed her hand on another student’s shoulder which caused him to lose his balance and fall to the ground.
By engaging in these activities, the Member committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.1), 1(15), 1(18) - unprofessional) and 1(19).
SUBMISSIONS ON PUBLICATION
The Committee received submissions from Counsel for the College and Counsel for the Member with respect to publication of the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
Counsel for the College argued that the Member’s name should be published. He submitted that the nature and seriousness of the misconduct warranted publication of the Member’s name. Counsel indicated that publication serves as both a specific and general deterrent. He submitted that hearings are open to the public and that resulting decisions are publicly accessible. In order to support the transparency of the proceedings, publication of the Member’s name should follow.
Counsel for the Member argued that the matter is appropriate to warrant publication without the Member’s name in the official publication of the College. Counsel reminded the Committee that it had the legislative authority to determine whether or not the Member’s name should be published.
Counsel for the Member submitted that the particulars of the decision are now available to the general public on the College’s website and this would be sufficient for the purposes of transparency and general deterrence. There was therefore no further need for publication of name. Additionally, counsel submitted that this was a single incident in the Member’s career, and at the modest end of the scale. The Member has retained her employment as a teacher and publication of her name might disrupt her career.
Both counsel supported their arguments about whether to publish with or without the name of the Member in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession with case law from earlier Discipline Committee decisions.
PENALTY
The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:
(a) the Member is directed to appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”);
(b) the Registrar is directed to impose the following terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such terms, conditions, or limitations to be recorded on the Register until such time as they are fulfilled:
(i) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding appropriate boundaries and boundary violation issues and anger management;
(ii) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the courses outlined in (i) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the course provider stating that:
A. he or she has reviewed a copy of the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest and Joint Submission on Penalty documents made exhibits at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and
B. the Member has successfully completed the course. (c) directs that there be publication of the findings and Order of the Committee in summary form, without the name of the Member, in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee carefully considered and accepted the joint submission on penalty. The reprimand by her peers, and made on behalf of her profession, will act as a specific deterrent to the Member. It will reinforce to her the inappropriate nature of her actions and the importance of maintaining appropriate student/teacher boundaries. It provides notice that such behaviour will not be tolerated. The fact that the reprimand will remain on the Member’s certificate for a period of three years will serve as a further specific deterrent to the Member.
The Committee determined that enrolment in a course of instruction regarding maintaining suitable boundaries and boundary violations issues and anger management will reinforce to the Member the importance of reacting appropriately in difficult situations.
The Committee directed that there be publication in summary form, without the name of the Member in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. The Committee accepted that the Member’s behaviour was at the lower end of the scale and was a single incident in a teaching career, and that over two years have passed since the incident. The Member continues to be employed by her Board. Specific deterrence has been met by the oral reprimand. Further, the notation of the reprimand will remain on the Member’s certificate for three years.
The goal of remediation is achieved through the required course that will be taken by the Member. General deterrence and transparency are achieved through publication of the facts and through access to the College’s website where full decisions are posted.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is fitting in the circumstances and serves and protects the public interest.
Date: August 8, 2012
Mel Greif
Chair, Discipline Panel
Irene Dembek, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel
Monika Ferenczy, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel