Another GTA doctor has been restricted to treating only males over allegations of sexual misconduct with female patients.

Burlington family doctor Sharif Tadros is accused of having sex with two of his patients in his office, according to a College of Physicians and Surgeons notice of hearing document.

Sastri Maharajh, a family doctor in Mississauga, was disciplined by the College for professional misconduct last year after admitting to resting his cheek or placing his mouth on the breasts of up to 13 patients. He was suspended for eight months and is now back on the job but can’t treat female patients.

A Star analysis of the College’s public register shows that of 296 physicians who face allegations or have already been disciplined for professional misconduct, incompetence or incapacity, 21 have gender-based restrictions on practising.

These instances raise questions about how the College deals with sexual transgressions of its members.

Marilou McPhedran, a lawyer who chaired two provincial task forces on sexual abuse of patients, doesn’t think the College has “adequately explained” its rationale for gender-based restrictions.

“What are the measurements (of competence), and why is that measurement when it’s happened to women not important enough to be an overall indicator of proficiency and competence of the health professional?” she said in an interview with Star.

Just three of the 21 physicians, including Tadros and Maharajh, have a complete restriction on treating female patients. Seventeen must be monitored when seeing female patients, either by a chaperone or video. One male physician is restricted from seeing male patients without a chaperone.

Sixteen of the 21 have already been disciplined for professional misconduct, while the remaining five, like Tadros, are awaiting a hearing. Neither he nor Maharajh face criminal charges.

As of Sept. 17, the College ordered that Tadros “not engage in any professional encounter or interaction with any female person.”

The 55-year-old family doctor faces allegations that he had a sexual relationship with a patient and smoked marijuana with that patient in his office, who started attending his clinic in November 2009 for Botox injections, according to the notice of hearing. In the same document, it’s alleged Tadros also had a sexual relationship with a patient who began seeing him in 1989, and that he continued to treat her husband and children in the period he carried on a sexual relationship with her.

The allegations have not been proven. Tadros did not respond to questions himself or through his lawyer.

The allegations qualify as sexual abuse under the Regulated Health Professionals Act (RHPA).

“Sexual involvement with a patient is sexual abuse under the RHPA regardless of whether the physician believes there is ‘consent’ from the patient,” wrote College representative Kathryn Clarke in an email.

McPhedran, who helped design the zero-tolerance legislative stance on sexual abuse in Ontario, said “there is no such thing as consensual sex” when it comes to doctor-patient relationships, where one is dependent on the other for health care.

That abuse of authority could result in criminal charges, criminal lawyer Jody Berkes said.

“Even if the ‘victim’ was consenting, the law would deem the consent not to be valid and would convict the doctor of sexual assault.”

In Ontario, the decision to notify authorities that one of their members may have committed a crime is at the discretion of medical regulatory bodies. A Star investigation found medical regulators in Alberta and some U.S. states must by law report a doctor suspected of committing a criminal offence to authorities.

Dr. Eric Hoskins recently ordered a review of the decades-old legislation, involving all 23 of the province's regulatory colleges, saying, “It’s been brought to my attention that there are some things we may need to change.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Tadros was ordered by the College to post a notice in his clinic indicating he could not treat female patients. There was no such notice posted at his clinic when the Star visited last week.

An employee at the clinic told the Star Tadros has retired. Tadros owns the clinic, according to front desk staff and incorporation records that list the Guelph Line clinic as his corporation’s address. The College said his licence is still active.

Dr. Khosro Shirpak, who works part-time at the clinic, said there was a sign posted at one point but he doesn’t know when or why it was taken down.

Its absence could be seen as a breach of the restriction with the College, which could be investigated as professional misconduct.

The College indicated it will be looking into the matter.

“Most of the patients actually like Dr. Tadros,” Shirpak said. “During the last week I had several patients who told me they do not believe those allegations. I haven’t seen a patient that said, ‘Oh, I knew it.’”

Shirpak said patients have told him they haven’t seen Tadros in a month.

“They want to know if they need to find another family doctor or not. They want to know if Dr. Tadros is coming back,” he said. “I don’t have the answers.”

Tadros has been disciplined by the college before on different matters.

A 1990 College disciplinary committee document shows that Tadros pleaded guilty to misconduct after it was alleged he forged a recommendation letter by another physician. He was suspended for three months and ordered to undergo treatment for addiction as a result, according to the disciplinary decision posted on the College’s website.

Another disciplinary decision states Tadros was reprimanded by the disciplinary panel in 2010 and fined $3,650 for failing to provide patient charts requested by the College in a reasonable amount of time.

McPhedran points out that although the province delegated responsibility to the College to ensure a “high standard of trust” between patients and physicians, the province is still ultimately accountable.