SYDNEY, N.S. — A rally took place on Thursday for a doctor who was given one week to close his office after learning his sponsoring doctor was pulling his support.
Dr. Manivansan Moodley, an obstetrician and gynecologist, was informed of the decision through a hand-delivered letter last week. Because Moodley is originally from India and studied in South Africa, he has a defined licence. These are given to doctors who haven’t yet fulfilled Canadian medical requirements.
A defined licence dictates the doctor must have two medical professionals overseeing his work: one a sponsor and one in the same field or a closely related one.
Because Moodley has lost his sponsor, he will no longer be able to practise medicine as of 4 p.m. Friday.
While it is still unclear why the doctor pulled his sponsorship, the College of Physicians and Surgeons announced on Thursday there will be a disciplinary hearing regarding allegations of professional misconduct and/or incompetence.
Dr. Gus Grant, registrar and CEO of the college, confirmed this hearing is due to two complaints received from two different women in July 2017, five months after Moodley began working at the Nova Scotia Health Authority.
These complaints resulted in a voluntary agreement between the college and Moodley to put restrictions on his practice. Moodley agreed to always have a female attendant in the room during examinations and will have no contact with patients outside of work.
"After a thorough investigation, it has been determined a disciplinary hearing is needed. It will be open to the public on Feb. 24 (in Bedford)," Grant said.
The notice of the disciplinary hearing is posted on the college’s website. Protecting the identity of the complainants, the posting outlines details of each person’s complaint.
The first person, identified at A.B., alleges Moodley’s conduct included:
Commenting inappropriately on the patient’s physical appearance.
• Performing a physical examination of the patient in a sexualized manner or alternatively in a manner inconsistent with accepted standards.
• In the course of the clinical encounter, initiated a discussion of a personal or sexual nature with the patient that was not relevant to the patient’s medical issues.
• Following the physical examination, asking questions of a sexual nature that were not relevant to the patient’s medical issues.
The second complainant, identified at C.D., alleges Moodley’s conduct included:
• Prior to informing her of test results, asking questions and making comments of a personal and sexual nature that were not relevant to the patient’s medical issues.
• Unnecessarily requesting an internal examination.
• In the course of conducting a pelvic ultrasound, complimenting her on the colour of her underwear.
• Following the physical examination, asking questions that were not relevant to the patient’s medical issues, including a suggestion about seeing her at her home and advising he knew where she lived.
Grant believes holding a rally in support of Moodley before the hearing might be harmful to the complainants.
“The public uproar on social media and call for a rally can only intimidate the witnesses,” he said during a phone interview from Halifax.
“I worry about the well-being of the two women who have come forward with complaints about sexual misconduct . . . (complaints of sexual misconduct) are so underrepresented because it’s so difficult for a woman to step forward because of (things like) public perception.”
Grant stressed while doctors deserve a fair hearing, complainants are also “entitled to come forward with minimal harm and obstruction.”
“I think this is making what’s already hard for these women much more difficult.”
Dr. Margaret Fraser, president of the Cape Breton Medical Staff Association is providing support to Moodley, who has hired a lawyer. She also said she finds the length of time the investigation took and the fact the original complaints were not included in the 2017 announcement of the restrictions put in place different from past college procedures in similar cases.
“This is very odd (not disclosing the complaints after restrictions were put in place),” she said.
“These allegations, while extremely serious, are still under investigation. The timing of this announcement is also curious. I wonder why it took three years to investigate what is essentially a 'he said/she said' kind of situation.”
Sources close to the Nova Scotia Health Authority, who spoke to the Cape Breton Post on the condition of anonymity because of their jobs, have said two doctors have come forth offering to be Moodley’s sponsor and supervisor (the doctor in the same field).
“I am an employee of the hospital and was warned by many managers, staff members, etc. that we will be reprimanded for attending the rally to support Dr. Moodley,” wrote one in an email.
“The managers are bullying the staff to keep us quiet, because we know something is terribly wrong.”
However, NSHA spokesperson Carla Adams said this hasn’t happened.
She also said they were unable to comment more on the situation.
“As you can appreciate, we respect the confidentiality of staff and physicians providing service within NSHA and are unable to comment further regarding this physician,” she said in a written statement.
Many of Moodley’s patients are worried what will happen to them if he isn’t able to continue his practice.
Taking to social media to voice concerns, some are in their third trimester of pregnancy and are afraid they won’t get another doctor in time. Some, like Stephanie Boutilier, have just had a surgery from Moodley and aren’t sure where they’ll go for followup checkups.
Boutilier said when she called to set up her followup appointment, Moodley’s secretary told her: “If you have any complications, I don’t know what to tell you.”
“She said I would need a referral for another gynecologist and that she couldn’t get me in to get one,” Boutilier said admitting she finds the situation frustrating when there is a doctor shortage in Cape Breton.
“My family doctor is trying to retrieve the file so he can make the referral but that (my followup appointment) probably isn’t going to happen in a month like it was supposed to. If there’s something going on up there, I’ll have to wait longer than a month to find out. I’m distraught. I don’t know what to do.”
There are also patients of Moodley’s who are waiting for surgery and Fraser explained losing Moodley means they are starting over and it’s going to cost taxpayers.
Since they’ll need to meet with a new doctor, they’ll have to wait for a consult (which will have to be paid for through tax dollars) and they’ll then be put at the bottom of the list.
According to the website waittimes.novascotia.ca, 90 per cent of people waiting for consult in this area were seen within 148 days and 90 per cent of people waiting for surgery were served within 144 days.
“For these patients, it’s like playing Snakes and Ladders and hitting square 99 where you have to go all the way back to number one again.”
The NSHA was unable to provide information regarding what might happen to Moodley’s patients before publication time.
RELATED:
