Section II
2.1 On June 10th 2013, I requested Dr. X to provide me with a full copy of my medical file. The documents which compose this file are contained in Exhibit C Item 1 through Item 18. This section is based on the evidence provided by these documents.
2.2 On the first page of Exhibit C Item 1, Dr X makes the notification: “N.B. : Today is not a medico-legal expertise (sic).”
2.3 Dr X was not asked for his medico-legal expertise at any time. I sought only medical treatment as advised by Dr. Latimer. But, if it may please le Ministre, I know of no one who goes to an avocat in order to have their tonsils or triglycerides checked. In the same vein I doubt any citizen of Québec will request a physician to perform the work required to assume a hypothèque.
2.4 By virtue of the statement recorded in his clinical record it is clear Dr X is offering some form of conditional medical service to me, his patient. He did not provide me with any notice that he was offering conditional medical service. I was not given any opportunity to provide informed consent to the conditional treatment offered up by Dr X. This constitutes a breech of Clause 11 of the Collège des médecins du Québec, Code of Ethics of Physicians, Medical Act (R.S.Q., c. M-9, s. 3), Professional Code (R.S.Q., c. C-26, s. 87), (hereafter “The Code”) promulgated by the Collège des médecins du Québec to wit: A physician must, in the practice of his profession assume full civil liability at all times. He may not attempt to elude or attempt to elude liability, nor request that a patient or person renounce any recourse taken in a case of professional negligence on his part.” [O.C. 1213-2002, s. 11.]
2.5 By his own hand, in his own clinical notes, Dr X seeks to evade liability by excusing his actions on the basis that he is not providing medico-legal expertise. He was never asked to provide medico-legal expertise (I am unable to ask for medico-legal advice as, to this day, I have no idea what it might be).
2.6 If Dr. X did not wish to involve himself in providing health care then he should have made this plain at the outset and I would have sought needed attention elsewhere. Dr. X did not do this. It is only now that a complaint in regard to Dr. X’s conduct is raised that he claims that he does not involve himself in “medico-legal medicine” when he was at no time, and in no way, requested to provide whatever is meant by this ambiguous and novel discipline.
2.7 I therefore assert that Dr X, by virtue of his failure to provide any opportunity for informed consent with regard to his conditional treatment of his patient acted in contravention of Code Clause 5 which states: “A physician must discharge his professional obligations with competence, integrity, and loyalty.” [O.C. 1213-2002, s. 5.]
2.8 It is asserted that by failing to notify his patient of his conditional service, Dr. X stands in breech of the requirement for integrity in his professional conduct.
2.9 I direct the attention of the Ministre to the fact that Dr. X has invented a novel medical discipline labelled “medico-legal” for the sole purpose of exonerating his actions, excusing his professional incompetence, and escaping civil liability.
2.10 Dr X has been joined in this effort by the Collège des médecins du Québec who, by supporting Dr X’s self-issued get-out-of-jail-free clause, fail to acknowledge and honour their own code of professional ethics, the exact professional code they are charged to enforce in order to protect the welfare of the citizens of Québec.
2.11 I draw the attention of the Minster of Health to the fact that this bogus medical speciality, and its vacuous character, have been accepted and referenced by the Collège des médecins du Québec in their letter to me of Septembre 20th 2013 and has been used by the Collège as a means to excuse the unprofessional behaviour of Dr X.
2.12 May it please the Minister of Health to remind him that within the legal jurisdiction of Québec any citizen may be called to testify as a witness in a court of law. Social station and professional affiliation provide no exemption to this provision of the law. May I further remind the Minster of Health that any signed and dated document may be introduced as evidence in a court of law and its probative value established under examination by the court.
2.13 Irregardless of what notes Dr. X secretly enters in his clinical record, irregardless of the fact he bases his claim for exemption on a non-existent, and unrecognized, medical discipline, irregardless of the fact that he is supported in this evasive endeavour by the Collège des médecins du Québec, it remains the fact that Dr. X may be called to answer for his actions in a court of law and the Collège des médecins du Québec may also be called and held to account for their compounding failure to exert an appropriate level of regulatory control over the members of their profession as, by virtue of its own written statements, the Collège des médecins du Québec has rendered itself jointly and severally liable for the professional indiscretions of Dr. X.
2.14 Further to the above, the Collège des médecins du Québec may face further legal sanction for their failure to acknowledge, recognize, and enforce, the professional code of ethics promulgated as law by the National Assembly of Québec.
2.15 Through the introduction and creation of a novel medical discipline as an excuse for his professional conduct Dr. X stands in violation of Code Clause 11 which states: “A physician must, in the practice of his profession, assume full civil liability at all times. He may not elude or attempt to elude liability, nor request that a patient or person renounce any recourse taken in a case of professional negligence on his part.” [O.C. 1213-2002, s. 11.] and of Code Clause 2 which states: “A physician may not exempt himself, even indirectly, from a duty or obligation contained in this Code.” [O.C. 1213-2002, s. 2.]
2.16 May le Ministre please pay close attention to the fact that in their letter to me of September 20th 2013 the Collège des médecins du Québec join with Dr. X and support him in his attempt to evade his professional responsibilities through the acceptance and promotion of a non-existent medical discipline.
2.17 I wish to ensure that this issue is clearly understood by all parties. May the Ministre please excuse me for battre un cheval mort.
2.18 What is here being proposed by Dr. X, and fully supported by the Collège des médecins du Québec, is some form of alternate court system, one in which members of the medical profession are granted the freedom to provide themselves an exemption from legal liability. That a professional regulatory body operating in the jurisdiction of Québec would make such a claim is both disconcerting and extremely peculiar.
2.19 May it please le Ministre, it is my intention in this document to libel and slander you and then to seek publication of such defamatory material in Le Devoir, La Presse, Le Journal de Montreal, and le Soleil. To protect myself from legal liability, I shall enter a phrase to the effect that my writings lack journalisto-legal expertise.