Facts
From 2008 to 2015, Dr Barhar was the Director of Obstetrics at Bacchus Marsh Hospital. Following a higher than State average rate of perinatal mortality during his tenure, in 2015 the Department of Health commissioned a review, which identified “catastrophic and unprecedented systemic governance failings with the obstetric services”.
Dr Parhar resigned and retired in 2015, surrendering his registration to the Medical Board. A significant number of AHPRA investigations were also conducted into staff working with Dr Parhar at Bacchus Marsh Hospital.
Dr Parhar was found by the Tribunal to have failed in almost every aspect of his role. The Tribunal found that he failed to conduct formal reviews in nine cases of perinatal death, and where reviews were conducted, he had failed to give sufficient clinical input and adequate processes were not used. Further, between 2009 – 2015, he failed to engage an external reviewer for cases involving fetal and neonatal deaths, failed to communicate important information and failed to supervise or assess junior practitioners who he was directly responsible for. Additionally, the Tribunal found that Dr Parhar failed to improve or maintain his own professional performance, did not keep accurate or legible clinical records, and inadequately investigated, diagnosed and managed a patient’s care.
Outcome
Dr Parhar admitted all allegations and claimed that he had understood that his role as ‘Director’ was in title only. The Tribunal recognised that poor working conditions for staff at Bacchus Marsh Hospital was a factor in patient outcomes, but that such conditions were not an excuse for sub-standard practice and characterised Dr Pahar’s conduct as wilful blindness for personal responsibility, and a failure to take professional responsibility.
The Tribunal also disagreed with the Board’s submission that a voluntary undertaking from Dr Parhar that he would never seek registration again should serve as sufficient general deterrence. Rather, the Tribunal held that formalising the Dr Parhar’s voluntary decision to retire minimalised the seriousness of his conduct. Instead, the Tribunal’s aim in sentencing was to send a clear message to practitioners that ‘if they engaged in similar conduct, their time as a doctor is likely to end well before their retirement’.
The Tribunal reprimanded Dr Parhar and disqualified him from applying for registration as a medical practitioner for 12 years, effectively acting as a permanent disqualification given his age.
Take Away
The Tribunal reserves this level of sanction for only the most serious misconduct. Its censure was in response to conduct that fell far short of good clinical practice and resulted in systemic failures leading to adverse patient outcomes but also reflected the responsibilities of senior health practitioners to conduct themselves with diligence in all aspects of their profession, including non-clinical matters
To read the full decision in Medical Board of Australia v Parhar (Review and Regulation) [2021] VCAT 1295, click here.