Discipline Decisions (December 2024)

• On or before May 29, 2021, he failed to provide the College with a completed Pharmacy Closing Statement;
• During the period April 29, 2021 to December 9, 2021, he:
  • Failed to remove all drugs and/or dispose of all drugs in the Pharmacy in an environmentally safe manner from the Pharmacy and as required by law;
  • Failed to make reasonable efforts to give notice to Pharmacy patients about the closure of the Pharmacy, the location of their records, and the manner in which their records could be accessed;
  • Failed to maintain all records and documents relating to the care of Pharmacy patients, including the original prescriptions, for a period of at least 10 years from the last recorded professional pharmacy service provided to each patient.

In particular, the Panel found that he:

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
• Contravened the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act and specifically sections 141, 147 and 157;
• Contravened one or more of the following:
  • Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, ss. 141, 147, and 157;
  • Food and Drug Regulations G.03.012; Narcotic Control Regulations ss. 43 and 45;
  • Personal Health Information Protection Act, s. 13;
  • O. Reg 264/16, s. 21;
• Engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances would reasonably be regarded by members as dishonourable and unprofessional.

Submissions with respect to the order to be imposed were heard on January 26, 2024. In a decision dated September 4, 2024, the Panel imposed an Order, as follows:

1. A reprimand in writing;

2. Directing the Registrar to impose the following specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration:

a. that the Registrant shall successfully complete at his own expense and within twelve (12) months of the date of this Order, the ProBE Program on Professional/Problem Based Ethics for Healthcare Professionals, with an unconditional pass;

b. that the Registrant shall be prohibited from acting as a Designated Manager in any pharmacy for a period of one (1) year from the date of the lifting of the suspension referred to in paragraph 3;

c. that the Registrant shall be prohibited from having any proprietary interest in any pharmacy from the date of this Order until one (1) year after the suspension referred to in paragraph 3 is lifted; and

d. that the Registrant shall only work for an employer in a pharmacy who provides confirmation in writing from the Designated Manager of the pharmacy, within fourteen (14) days of his commencing employment, that they have been provided with a copy of the Notice of Hearing and the Panel’s Decision and Reasons in this matter, for a period of three (3) years from the date of the lifting of the suspension referred to in paragraph 3.

3. Directing the Registrar to suspend the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration for a period of six (6) months or until the Registrant has successfully completed the remedial training as specified in subparagraph 2(a) above, whichever is longer.

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $56,168.88.

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that practising pharmacy is a privilege, not a right, and involves ensuring that the professional duties owed to patients, the profession, and the College are met.

The Panel pointed out that the Registrant was found to have committed serious professional misconduct involving his failure to meet the requirements for the appropriate and lawful closure of the pharmacy. The College made repeated attempts to explain the steps he needed to take to safely and lawfully close the pharmacy – but he ignored that advice and simply closed the pharmacy, completely disregarding his professional duties.

The Panel observed that the Registrant’s conduct included leaving patient records, prescriptions, and narcotics behind in the pharmacy, and failing to notify patients about their prescriptions and patient records. This resulted in College staff having to attend at the pharmacy to deal with matters that the Registrant simply refused to deal with, and retrieve the drugs and records and transfer them to the College for safe keeping.

The Panel indicated that the Registrant’s non-attendance and non-participation in any aspect of the discipline proceedings resulted in lengthy, costly contested hearings, which costs may have been significantly reduced had he engaged in the proceedings.

The Panel relayed that College registrants are expected to practise ethically and professionally and comply with all applicable laws and standards at all times. The Panel expressed its trust that the Registrant will reflect and learn from this shameful experience and that his successful completion of the remediation training will rehabilitate his practice for the future.

• Submitted fraudulent claims, related to unauthorized and/or invalid prescriptions, to [Insurer] and Ontario Drug Benefit for reimbursement;
• Forged prescription authorizations for certain identified prescriptions;
• Falsified records relating to his practice in connection with certain identified patient profiles;
• Regularly prescribed medications to himself in contravention of the College’s Policy on Treating Self and Family Members;
• Regularly prescribed medications to his [family member] in contravention of the College’s Policy on Treating Self and Family Members;
• Accessed a person’s health record in connection with a prescription provided for Tagrisso for patient [Name];
• Manually adjusted the price of certain identified prescriptions.

In particular, the Panel found that he:

• Failed to maintain the standards of practice of the profession;
• Failed to keep records as required respecting his practice;
• Falsified records relating to his practice and a person’s health record;
• Signed or issued, in his professional capacity, a document that he knew or ought to have known contained a false or misleading statement;
• Accessed a person’s health record without a professional reason to do so;
• Submitted an account or charge for services or products that he knew or ought to have known was false or misleading;
• Contravened the Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, or the regulations under those Acts, and in particular, section 155(1) of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act;
• Engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.

The Panel imposed an Order, as follows:

1. A reprimand;

2. That the Registrar is directed to impose specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s certificate of registration, and in particular:

a. That the Registrant successfully complete, within twelve months from the date of this Order, and at his own expense, the ProBE Program on Professional/Problem-Based Ethics for healthcare professionals offered by the Centre for Personalized Education for Physicians, and any related evaluations, with an unconditional pass;

b. That the Registrant successfully complete, at his own expense and within 12 months of the date of this Order, all six of the College’s current Jurisprudence e-Learning Modules and the Jurisprudence Exam;

c. That the Registrant shall be prohibited from acting as a Designated Manager at any pharmacy for a period of three years from the date of this Order;

d. That the Registrant shall be prohibited from having any proprietary interest in a pharmacy as sole proprietor or partner, or as shareholder in a corporation that owns a pharmacy, or in any other capacity, for a period of three years from the date of this Order;

e. That the Registrant shall only work for an employer in a pharmacy, including as a relief pharmacist, where the employer provides confirmation in writing from the Designated Manager of the pharmacy to the College, within seven days of the Registrant commencing employment at the pharmacy, that the Designated Manager received and reviewed a copy of the panel’s decision and reasons in this matter.

f. That the employer notification requirement in paragraph 2(e) shall apply until and unless the Registrant successfully applies to the Discipline Committee for an order terminating the requirement, which application may not be made for a minimum of three years from today’s date.

3. The Registrar is directed to suspend the Registrant’s certificate of registration for thirteen (13) months with one (1) month of the suspension to be remitted on condition that the Registrant complete the remedial training as specified in subparagraph 2(a) and 2(b). The suspension shall commence on September 27, 2024 and shall run without interruption until September 26, 2025, inclusive. If the remitted portion of the suspension is required to be served by the Registrant because he fails to complete the remedial requirements specified in subparagraphs 2(a) and/or 2(b), that portion of the suspension shall commence on September 27, 2025 and run without interruption until October 26, 2025, inclusive. If the time for completing the remedial training in subparagraphs 2(a) and/or 2(b) above is extended by the Registrar, the date on which the remitted portion of the suspension shall commence, if required, shall be adjusted accordingly.

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $10,000.

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that honesty, integrity, and trust are paramount to the profession of pharmacy. The public expects pharmacists to play a significant role in the provision of healthcare in Ontario, and places great trust in pharmacists.

The Panel expressed its extreme disappointment with the Registrant’s actions. These actions include falsifying pharmacy records and knowingly submitting false claims and billings to insurers, which breached the public trust and are considered professional misconduct.

The Panel indicated its concern with the egregiousness of this behaviour where an amount greater than $130,000 was fraudulently submitted for reimbursement to third parties. The public trusts registrants to be ethical and honest in submitting claims and the voiding of this trust made the Registrant’s judgement questionable.

The Panel relayed its expectation that the Registrant will learn from this process, that he will improve his practice of pharmacy, and that he will work hard to regain the trust he has lost through his actions. The Panel expects that the Registrant will not appear in the future before a panel of the Discipline Committee.

a. Failed to ensure that the Point of Care Symbol and/or Notice to Patient were clearly and publicly displayed as required by the College’s Designated Manager – Required Signage in a Community Pharmacy Policy, between on or about November 9, 2022 to on or about April 14, 2023;

b. Failed to maintain the Pharmacy in a clean and orderly fashion, and in a good state of repair, in relation to:

i. The patient consultation area that was cluttered, had ceiling tiles missing, and wet floors, on or about April 14, 2023;

ii. The compounding area that was untidy and/or had food stuffs present, on one or more occasions between on or about November 9, 2022 to on or about April 14, 2023; and/or

iii. The inadequate monitoring of fridge temperatures, between on or about November 9, 2022 to on or about April 14, 2023;

c. Failed to keep documents respecting patients, the operation of the Pharmacy and/or the practice of members practising in the Pharmacy as required by the Model Standards for Pharmacy Compounding of Non-Sterile Preparations and/or the Guidance Document for Pharmacy Compounding of Non-Sterile Preparations, from on or about November 9, 2022 to on or about April 14, 2023;

d. Failed to have procedures in place to protect the confidentiality of personal health information and/or other personal information maintained by the Pharmacy in relation to delivery logs and/or returned to stock medications on one or more occasions between on or about November 9, 2022 to on or about April 14, 2023;

e. Kept medications, pre-made batches of compounds, and/or compounding ingredients in the dispensary shelf that were not properly labelled on one or more occasions between on or about November 9, 2022 to on or about April 14, 2023; and/or

f. Failed to respond to the College’s request for an action plan in relation to the Level I Assessment and/or the Level II Assessment.

In particular, the Panel found that the Registrant and Cavanagh Apothecary Ltd., c.o.b. as Cavanagh IDA Pharmacy, as the holder of Certificate of Accreditation #6114 for the Pharmacy:

• Failed to maintain any of the standards of accreditation;
• Failed to reply within a reasonable time to a written or electronic inquiry or request from the College;
• Failed to keep documents as required respecting patients, the operation of the pharmacy or the practice of members practising in the pharmacy;
• Failed to keep confidential personal health information or other personal information concerning a patient, except with the consent of the patient or the patient’s authorized representative or as otherwise permitted or required by law;
• Contravened the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Pharmacy Act, 1991, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, the Ontario Drug Benefits Act or the regulations under those Acts, in particular:
  • Section 19(j) of the Ontario Regulation 264/16, as amended, made under the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c H4, as amended;
  • Section 4(3) of the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, RSO 1990, c P23, as amended, and/or section 1 of Notice to Patients, RRO 1990, Reg. 936, as amended, made under the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act, RSO 1990, c P23, as amended;
• Engaged in conduct or performing an act relevant to the operation of a pharmacy that, having regard to the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.

The Panel imposed an Order, as follows:

1. A reprimand;

2. Directing the Registrar to impose specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s certificate of registration, including:

a. The Registrant must successfully complete, at his own expense, and within 12 months of the date on which this Order becomes final, a mentorship program. The mentorship program must focus on the concerns raised in the reports from the assessments dated November 8, 2022 and April 14, 2023 (the “Audit Reports”), as well as the roles and responsibilities of a Designated Manager. The mentorship program shall include the following terms:

i. The Registrant shall retain, at his own expense, a mentor selected and approved by the College;

ii. The Registrant shall meet at least five (5) times with the mentor, for the purpose of reviewing the Registrant’s practice with respect to the concerns raised in the Audit Reports.

iii. To this end, the Registrant shall provide the mentor with the following documents related to this proceeding:

(1) A copy of the Notice of Hearing;

(2) a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts;

(3) a copy of this Joint Submission on Order;

(4) a copy of the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Panel, when available; and

(5) a copy of the Audit Reports as identified in the Agreed Statement of Facts.

iv. The Registrant shall develop a learning plan with the mentor to comprehensively address the issues raised in the Audit Reports and the role and responsibilities of a Designated Manager. The learning plan shall include, but is not limited to, successful completion by the Registrant of the College’s Designated Manager e-Learning Module and its associated Certificate of Completion;

v. The Registrant shall demonstrate to the mentor that he has successfully achieved all of the goals of the learning plan; and

vi. The Registrant shall require the mentor to report the results of the Mentorship Program to the College within thirteen months of the date on which this Order becomes final. Such report shall include, but is not limited to:

(1) the Registrant’s Certificate of Completion of the College’s Designated Manager e-Learning Module;

(2) the learning plan; and

(3) the Mentor’s Reporting Form as provided by the College, which shall include the mentor’s assessment of the Registrant’s success in meeting the goals of the learning plan.

b. that the Registrant must successfully complete, at his own expense and within twelve (12) months of the date on which this Order becomes final, a course with Gail E. Siskind Consulting Services, Dr. Erika Abner, or another professional ethics consultant acceptable to the College (the “Consultant”), to be designed by the Consultant, with the purpose of addressing the professional misconduct issues raised in this case. The following terms shall apply to the course:

i. The number of sessions shall be at the discretion of the Consultant, but shall be a minimum of two (2) sessions;

ii. The manner of attendance at the session(s) (e.g. in person, via videoconference, etc.) is a matter to be discussed in advance between the Registrant and the Consultant, but shall ultimately be at the discretion of the Consultant;

iii. The Registrant shall provide the Consultant with the following, in advance of the course to facilitate the design of the course:

a. A copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts;

b. A copy of the Joint Submission as to Penalty and Costs; and

c. A copy of the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Panel, if and when available.

iv. Successful completion of the course shall be determined by the Consultant, based on the design of the course, but must include completion of an essay acceptable to the Registrar, which essay shall address the professional misconduct issues arising in this case;

v. The essay shall be at least 1,000 words in length and the Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of the essay’s review by the Consultant to assist the Registrar to determine whether the essay is acceptable, up to a maximum of $500; and

vi. The Registrant shall direct the Consultant to report the results of the course to the College, no later than 13 months from the date on which this Order becomes final, and to confirm that the Registrant has completed the course to the satisfaction of the Consultant.

c. that the Registrant shall be prohibited from acting as a Designated Manager at any pharmacy for a period of 4 years from the date on which this Order becomes final, and then continuing until such time as it is removed by order of the Discipline Committee, on the application of the Registrant.

d. The Registrant’s practice and the operation of any pharmacy in which he has a proprietary interest shall be subject to Compliance Audit Reviews (“CARs”) by the College. The following terms apply to the CARs:

i. The College will be entitled to conduct any CAR for a period of three (3) years from the date on which the mentorship program set out in paragraph 2(a) is satisfied (“CARs Period”);

 ii. If the Registrant ceases to have a place of practice and/or a proprietary interest in any pharmacy at any time within the three (3) years specified in subparagraph d(i) above, such that the College is unable to conduct any CARs, then the CARs Period shall be paused and shall resume on the date on which the Registrant obtains a place of practice and/or a proprietary interest in a pharmacy, and in such circumstances:

(1) The Registrant shall notify the College immediately, in writing, if he no longer has a place of practice and/or a proprietary interest in a pharmacy at any point(s) during any times that the CARs Period remains active; and

(1) If the CARs Period is paused at any time(s), the Registrant shall notify the College, in writing, when he obtains a place of practice and/or a proprietary interest in a pharmacy, at which point the CARs Period shall resume and shall continue until a total period of three (3) years has been achieved;

iii. The CARs will be conducted by either in person or through a remote or virtual method by a representative of the College at the Registrant’s place of practice and/or at any pharmacy in which the Registrant holds a proprietary interest, at such times as the College may determine;

 iv. During any CARs, the College representative will be entitled to review and examine the Registrant’s practice, or the practice and operation of any pharmacy in which the Registrant holds a proprietary interest;

v. The CARs are in addition to any routine inspections conducted by the College pursuant to the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.4., s.148, and are not substitute for such inspections;

vi. The Registrant shall fully cooperate with the College representative during the CARs; and

 vii. The Registrant shall pay to the College in respect of such CARs the amount of $1,000.00 per CAR, immediately after each CAR is completed, with the total amount to be paid by the Registrant not to exceed $3,000, regardless of the number of CARs and/or attendances conducted by the College.

3. Directing the Registrar to suspend the Registrant’s certificate of registration for a period of 5 months, with 1 month of the suspension to be remitted on condition that the Registrant complete the remedial training as specified in paragraphs 2(a) and 2(b), above.

The suspension shall commence on the date on which this Order becomes final and shall run, without interruption, for 4 months.

If the remitted portion of the suspension is required to be served by the Registrant, because he fails to complete the remedial requirement specified in paragraphs 2(a) and 2(b) above, that portion of the suspension shall commence on the date that is 13 months from the date on which this Order becomes final and shall run, without interruption, for 1 month.

If the time for completing the remedial steps in paragraphs 2(a), and/or 2(b), above, is extended by the Registrar, the date on which the remitted portion of the suspension shall commence, if required, shall be adjusted accordingly

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $25,000.

The reprimand in this matter remains outstanding.

1. operated, and/or permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the operation of, the Pharmacy without a pharmacist physically present;
2. permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the dispensing and/or sale of drugs, including prescription drugs, at the Pharmacy, while no pharmacist was present and/or by unauthorized persons, in relation to all drugs and prescription drugs dispensed and/or sold at the Pharmacy from May 31 to June 4, 2023;
3. permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the preparation of methadone doses, and/or the witnessing of the ingestion of methadone doses, at the Pharmacy, while no pharmacist was present and by unauthorized persons, in relation to all doses of methadone prepared and/or ingested at the Pharmacy from May 31 to June 4, 2023;
4. permitted, consented to, or approved, expressly or impliedly, the dispensing of drugs at the Pharmacy without accurately recording the information required by s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c. H.4, in relation to certain identified prescriptions;

In particular, the Panel found that she:

• Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
• Contravened the Pharmacy Act, the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, the Narcotics Safety and Awareness Act, 2010, the Drug Interchangeability and Dispensing Fee Act or the Ontario Drug Benefit Act or the regulations under those Acts:
  • s. 146(1)(a), s. 149, s. 156 of the Drug and Pharmacies Regulation Act, RSO 1990, c. H.4;
• Contravened a federal, provincial or territorial law or municipal by-law with respect to the distribution, purchase, sale, or dispensing or prescribing of any drug or product, the administering of any substance, or the piercing of the dermis:
  • s. C.01.041 of the Food and Drug Regulations, CRC, c. 870, made under the Food and Drugs Act, RSC 1985, c F-27;
  • s. 5(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c.19;
• Engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as dishonourable and unprofessional.

The Panel imposed an Order, as follows:

1. A reprimand;

2. That the Registrar is directed to impose specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration, and in particular:

a. The Registrant shall successfully complete within twelve (12) months of the date of the Order, a course with Gail E. Siskind Consulting Services, or another professional ethics consultant approved by the College, to address the professional misconduct arising from this matter, to be designed by the consultant. The following terms shall apply to the course:

i. The number of sessions shall be at the discretion of the consultant, but shall be no fewer than three;

ii. The manner of attendance at the sessions (e.g., in person, videoconference, etc.) is a matter to be discussed in advance between the Registrant and the consultant, but shall ultimately be at the discretion of the consultant;

iii. The Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of the course;

iv. The Registrant shall provide to the consultant the following documents, in advance of the course, to facilitate the design of the course:

1. A copy of the Notice of Hearing, the Agreed Statement of Facts, and this Joint Submission on Order; or

2. A copy of the Panel’s Decision and Reasons, if available;

v. The Registrant shall direct the consultant to report the results of the ethics course to the College, which report shall be made no later than thirteen (13) months from the date this Order becomes final, to confirm that the Registrant completed the course to the consultant’s satisfaction.

b. The Registrant shall successfully complete, at her own expense and within twelve (12) months of the date of the Order, all six of the College’s current Jurisprudence e-learning Modules and the Jurisprudence Exam;

c. The Registrant shall successfully complete, at her own expense and within twelve (12) months of the date of the Order, the College’s Designated Manager (DM) Module and obtain its associated Certificate of Completion, or provide proof of her successful completion of the Module within the 18 months prior to the date of the Order;

d. The Registrant shall successfully complete, at her own expense and within twelve (12) months of the date of the Order, the CAMH Opioid Use Disorder Treatment Course;

e. The Registrant shall be prohibited from acting as Designated Manager in any pharmacy for one (1) year from the date of this Order, or until the successful completion of the remediation described in paragraphs 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(d) above, whichever is longer;

3. That the Registrar suspend the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration for a period of four (4) months, with one (1) month of the suspension to be remitted on condition that the Registrant complete the remedial training as specified in paragraphs 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and 2(d) above. The suspension shall commence on November 4, 2024, and shall continue until February 3, 2025, inclusive. If the remitted portion of the suspension is required to be served by the Registrant because she fails to complete the remedial requirements specified in subparagraph 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), and/or 2(d), above, that portion of the suspension shall commence on November 4, 2025, and shall continue until December 3, 2025, inclusive. If the time for completing the remedial steps in paragraphs 2(a), 2(b), 2(c) and/or 2(d) above is extended by the Registrar, the date on which the remitted portion of the suspension shall commence, if required, shall be adjusted accordingly.

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $10,000.

In its reprimand, the Panel noted that the Registrant operated a pharmacy without a licensed pharmacist present. Her actions resulted in several other acts of professional misconduct, including the sale of drugs without a pharmacist present, permitting the preparation of methadone doses and witnessing their ingestion without a pharmacist present, and permitting the dispensing of drugs without accurately recording the required information.

The Panel explained that the Registrant’s decision to allow an unlicensed individual to work as a pharmacist, and her failure to ensure the presence of a licensed pharmacist, compromised the safety and well-being of the public. Her conduct is not only unprofessional, but also dishonourable, as it contravened the standards of practice expected of a pharmacist. She engaged in conduct that demonstrated serious moral failings.

The Panel relayed that, as a pharmacist, the Registrant should have known what she was doing was wrong. The Panel expressed its trust that she will learn from this experience and adhere to the professional standards expected of her in the future.

• Engaged in an inappropriate romantic and/or sexual relationship, that included kissing, touching of a sexual nature, and/or remarks of a romantic and sexual nature; and/or
• Failed to maintain professional boundaries of the pharmacist-patient relationship, including by, on one or more occasion, (a) kissing, (b) touching of a sexual nature, and/or (c) remarks of a romantic and sexual nature.

In particular, the Panel found that the Registrant:

1. Sexually abused a patient;
2. Failed to maintain a standard of practice of the profession;
3. Engaged in conduct or performed an act relevant to the practice of pharmacy that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.

The Panel imposed an Order, as follows:

1. A reprimand;

2. That the Registrar be directed to suspend the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration for a period of 12 months. The suspension shall commence on December 5, 2024, and shall run without interruption until December 4, 2025, inclusive;

3. That the Registrar be directed to impose specified terms, conditions or limitations on the Registrant’s Certificate of Registration, as follows:

a. That the Registrant successfully complete, with an unconditional pass at his own expense, and within 12 months from the date that the Order becomes final, the ProBE Program: Professional/Problem- Based Ethics, offered by the Centre for Personalized Education for Professionals; and

b. That the Registrant successfully complete at his own expense, and within 12 months from the date that he successfully completes the ProBE course, a course with Gail E. Siskind Consulting Services, or another professional ethics consultant acceptable to the College, designed by the consultant with the purpose of addressing the professional misconduct issues raised in this case. The following terms shall apply to the course:

A. The number of sessions shall be at the discretion of the consultant, but shall be no fewer than two;

B. The manner of attendance at the sessions (for example, in person, via Zoom, etc.) shall be discussed in advance between the Registrant and the consultant, but ultimately shall be at the discretion of the consultant;

C. The Registrant shall provide the consultant with the Agreed Statement of Facts and this Joint Submission on Order and Costs or the Panel’s decisions in this case, his evaluation from the ProBE course, and any essay he completes as part of that course. The Registrant shall discuss the issues arising from that course with the consultant;

D. Successful completion of the course includes completion of an essay acceptable to the Registrar, which essay shall address the professional misconduct issues arising in this case;

E. The essay shall be at least 1,000 words in length and the Registrant shall be responsible for the cost of the essay’s review by the consultant to assist the Registrar to determine whether the essay is acceptable, up to a maximum of $500; and

F. The Registrant shall direct the consultant to report the results of the ethics course to the College, which report shall be made no later than twenty-five (25) months from the date this Order becomes final, to confirm that the Registrant completed the course to the consultant’s satisfaction.

4. Costs to the College in the amount of $10,000

In its reprimand, the Panel observed that sexual abuse of a patient and the failure to maintain appropriate professional boundaries are among the most serious breaches of professional ethics.

The Panel noted that, as a pharmacist, the Registrant is expected to maintain the highest standards of professional conduct and to prioritize the well-being of his patients at all times. He failed to do so. His conduct demonstrates a profound lack of judgement and a disregard for his professional responsibilities.

The Panel explained that the Registrant knew that the individual he was involved with was a vulnerable patient. His actions have not only harmed the individual directly involved but have also undermined the integrity of the pharmacy profession as a whole.

The Panel pointed out that the profession of pharmacy is a noble profession. Pharmacists are expected to act ethically, with integrity, and in accordance with all applicable laws and policies. The Registrant failed to do so.

The Panel observed that the Order contains important remediation and rehabilitation measures. The Registrant must take these measures seriously, learn from them, and apply them in his practice. The Panel expressed its hope that the Registrant will learn from this experience and that he will never again appear before a Discipline Committee panel.