CHATOORGOON GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT

Chatoorgoon said the board gave its decision last week that a notice he stuck in the main operating theatre last year amounted to disgraceful conduct on his (Chatoorgoon’s) part.

Chatoorgoon’s notice, which was addressed to his anaesthetists colleagues at SFGH and which four doctors took to the Medical Board, stated in part that he (Chatoorgoon) would administer a “lethal dose of deprivan.” Deprivan is one of the drugs that is administered to patients to put them to sleep in preparation for surgery.

Dr Neil Singh, secretary of the council of the medical board, confirmed to Newsday yesterday that Chatoorgoon was found guilty by a tribunal appointed by the council — of infamous and disgraceful conduct.

Singh said that Chatoorgoon has been requested to appear before the tribunal on June 26, which will hear from him before it (the tribunal) decides on what sanction to impose.

Yesterday, Chatoorgoon confirmed he had been informed of the tribunal’s decison, but the specialist anaesthetist maintained that his notice was meant as a joke.

The issue of the “Deprivan Notice” surfaced when Chatoorgoon posted the notice on April 18, 2005. Among the words of advice to his fellow anaesthetists, the notice stated, “If anyone betrays the anaesthetist’s cause they will get a lethal does of deprivan.” The note, signed by Chatoorgoon, ended, “All the best in Love and Light.”

Three days later, four doctors — Steve Budhoram, Lakhan Roop, Raj Persad and Colin Furlonge — filed a complaint with the board that the notice was offensive.

The board wrote to Director of Public Prosecution Geoffrey Henderson for advice. Henderson informed the then Commissioner of Police. Acting Sergeant Sebastien Nabbie of the San Fernando CID interviewed Chatoorgoon about the notice. No charges were laid.

In November, 2005, the council of the medical board wrote to Chatoorgoon informing him that a tribunal had been appointed to enquire into the complaint made by the four doctors. He was summoned to appear before the tribunal. Chatoorgoon was represented at the tribunal during several hearings by attorneys Rikki Harnanan and Daryl Allahar. The tribunal comprised — Dr Steve Smith (president); Dr Neil Adrian Singh (secretary), Dr Peter Bhaggan and Dr Windsor Federick.

The tribunal’s decision stated, “We have as a committee deliberated on the statements and submissions made to the tribunal and we cannot say we have found the ‘Notice,’ in particular paragraph six thereof, to constitute a clear threat of homicide. The Notice constitutes in our opinion a clear departure from standards of conduct expected from a medical practitioner and correspondingly constitutes infamous or disgraceful conduct within the meaning of the Medical Board Act.”

Yesterday, Cha-toorgoon, a specialist anaesthetist who once acted as medical director of the SFGH, told Newsday that he had consulted with Senior Counsel Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj about the tribunal’s decision. Contacted yesterday, Maharaj declined to comment on the issue except to say that the council’s decision would be challenged legally.

Chatoorgoon, reiterating that his “Notice” was meant as a joke, told Newsday that he has since obtained testimonials from 16 fellow anaesthetists. “I will submit those (testimonials) to the tribunal,” Chatoorgoon said, “for the June 26 hearing.”

Newsday was told that the council, upon finding a doctor guilty of misconduct, is empowered to impose any of three sanctions. It can reprimand and discharge, suspend for a maximum of two years or strike the doctor off its registration list