Thursday, July 26, 2012

Professional Misconduct, Corruption and Naughty Behaviour

I have JAV role-playing fetishes in my mind playing the whole day. Dr Kong Sim Guan was suspended for 3 years by the SMC for screwing his patient. Also today, there was news about a NUS law faculty lecturer being investigated by the bloodhound CPIB in a sex-for-grades scandal with his consenting student. I want to see if she is some skanky chiobu and hoping someone updates Gutter. Waiting. Waiting.

Wait. WTF how come a doctor who screwed his patient is reprimanded by SMC while a still unnamed horny law professor who screwed his go-getter consenting student is having coffee with CPIB now? Where does misconduct end and corruption start in sex cases? As a parallel, there were many other cases where doctors who sold controlled Subutex probably to patients abusing Subutex, and were just give slaps on the wrists and suspended by SMC. Not CNB cases.

What about the horny SCDF and CNB chiefs and their sordid sex acts. Was it misconduct, which basically just means ear-pulling and towel flicks to the balls by their wives, or corruption. Ooooo corruption means jail time, and thus ear-pulling and towel flicks to the balls by other inmates who really want to get back at civil servants remotely related to the police.

SINGAPORE - A psychiatrist has been suspended for three years for having a long-term sexual relationship with a patient while she was under his care.

Dr Kong Sim Guan, a psychiatrist at The Psychiatric & Behavioural Medicine Clinic (Ang & Kong), faced one charge of professional misconduct arising from a complaint to the Singapore Medical Council (SMC) on March 23, 2010.

"The fact that Dr Kong had a sexual relationship with the patient for at least 10 years between 1997 to about 2008 was never denied," said the SMC in a statement today.

Dr Kong, 63, contested the charge on the basis that the relationship only started after the doctor-patient relationship had ended.

According to the published grounds of decision, Dr Kong claimed that the sexual relationship only started after June 5, 1997, when the patient "seduced" him.

However during the hearing, which lasted six days and with five witnesses giving testimony, the disciplinary committee found "incontrovertible documentary evidence" that Dr Kong was her doctor and provided medical advice, prescriptions, admission notes, medical certificates and medical reports for the patient.

Dr Kong, whose suspension took effect on June 24, also contended that he was treating a family member by likening the patient to a mistress, who would be recognised as a "de facto wife" in "many countries".

Providing prescription to one's mistress cannot constitute a doctor-patient relationship, he had argued.

Dr Kong further claimed that the patient had a "borderline personality" and was out to trap him from January 2007.

The disciplinary committee, however, said that regardless of whether one treats a family member or complete stranger, "the fact remains that the doctor is providing treatment as a doctor", said the SMC.

The committee also considered the patient as "vulnerable" as she started out seeking psychiatric help.

"As her psychiatrist, Dr Kong should have been more than aware that his sexual relationship with her can only be interpreted as taking advantage of her troubled state and vulnerability, let alone exacerbating and complicating her marital problems," said the SMC.

In the grounds of decision, the disciplinary committee said: "Whilst we are prepared to give the respondent (Dr Kong) the benefit of doubt that the patient did initiate the relationship, or even seduced him, the respondent could have stopped the patient from taking this matter further.

"We, however, find that he encouraged her, directly or indirectly, by visiting the patient at her home, taking her to her physiotherapist and accompanying her to a hotel."

In sentencing, the committee considered Dr Kong's "unblemished record for over 30 years" and his extensive service to the professional community and the community at large.

Dr Kong was also fined S$10,000 and has to bear the costs and expenses of the inquiry.

1 comment:

  1. Hey, your prata looks mighty good! Share from which stall, can?