by arthur Weinreb, associate Editor,
July 12, 2004
On July 8, London Ontario psychiatrist, Dr. Stanley Dobrowolski was found not guilty of two offences involving two sisters before a disciplinary panel of the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons. all allegations against Dr. Dobrowolski involved improper conduct with female patients.
Earlier in the disciplinary hearing, the doctor pleaded guilty to a further count of improper conduct that involved spending the night with a patient in an Ottawa hotel. The penalty for that disciplinary offence will be imposed by the College this week.
Dr. Dobrowolski has been the subject of three previous hearings since 1994 and prior to his latest guilty plea, he has been found guilty of nine of other offences--all involving female patients or former patients. at the time of this writing the doctor is still licensed to practice medicine in the province of Ontario.
Dr. Dobrowolski’s legal difficulties were, of course of interest to the media and were duly reported. Most reports quite naturally contained information about the current offences and the doctor’s previous disciplinary history. What was left out of these reports was a simple statement as to the timing, not of the findings of the various disciplinary panels but of the commission of these offences.
Obviously, the fact that he was found guilty of 10 offences instead of one is relevant. But so is when these offences were committed. a quick reading of these reports gives the impression that Dr. Dombrowolski was charged, disciplined and then went out and "did it again". This was not the case. all of the offences that the doctor has been found guilty of were committed prior to the holding of the first disciplinary offence. In other words since the College began proceedings the doctor has not been found to have engaged in improper conduct with patients.
The fact that the doctor faced multiple hearings stemmed from the timing of when the women went to the College of Physicians and Surgeons with their complaints and not from further misconduct by the doctor. In an attempt to portray Dombrowolski in the worst possible light, the media left the impression that prior penalties had no affect on his conduct and that he kept repeating his conduct. It would have been a simple matter to insert a sentence that clearly stated that all these wrongful acts took place prior to the first hearing.