Full Decision Download
This matter came before a panel of the Discipline Committee of the College of Optometrists of Ontario on October 10 and October 11, 2018, in Toronto, Ontario. The Panel issued a decision and reasons on finding on January 11, 2019.
THE PANEL FOUND that it is more likely than not that on November 30, 2006, Dr. Miller twice took Patient A’s hand and put it on his genital area and that this constitutes both touching of a sexual nature of the patient by the member and behavior of a sexual nature by the member towards the patient, both of which constitute sexual abuse of a patient as defined in subsection 1(3) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, being Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (the “Code”).
THE PANEL FOUND that the actions of Dr. Miller constitute professional misconduct pursuant to clause 51(1)(b.1) of the Code.
Read the full Discipline decision and reasons on finding.
On March 4, 2019, THE PANEL MADE AN ORDER that:
- The Registrar be directed to revoke Dr. Miller’s certificate of registration;
- Dr. Miller be required to appear before the panel to be reprimanded;
- Dr. Miller shall provide the College with a certified cheque in the amount of $16,060 by April 4, 2019, representing security to guarantee the payment of any amounts Dr. Miller may be required to reimburse the College for funding under the program required by s.85.7 of the Health Professions Procedural Code in relation to Patient A. Any funds that have not been used for the purposes of the program required by s. 85.7 of the Health Professions Procedural Code shall be returned to Dr. Miller by the College, without interest, at the expiration of the 5-year time period within which funding may be provided; and
- Dr. Miller be directed to partially reimburse the College for its costs in relation to this proceeding in the amount of $37,000 by April 4, 2019.
Read the full Discipline decision and reasons on penalty.
On April 28, 2020, the Divisional Court set aside the decision of the Discipline Committee and returned the matter for a new hearing by a differently constituted panel of the Discipline Committee.
Read the full decision here.