Dr. Manivasan Moodley sat beside his wife emotionless as the disciplinary hearing against him resumed Wednesday in Halifax.
The obstetrician-gynecologist has complaints filed against him by two women, who don't know each other, in regards to sexualized comments he made which they believe weren't relevant to the symptoms they had.
Both women's identities are protected due to the nature of the allegations. Complainant known as C.D. alleges along with asking if she "took care" of herself digitally or with toys, Moodley also went to her place of work, asked personal questions about the layout of her home and if her children could hear her during sexual activities.
The complainant known as A.B. also testified Moodley asked about her use of sex toys and sexual habits. She also said he didn't get consent before digitally applying lubricant to her vaginal wall.
Both women say Moodley made inappropriate comments about their appearance, asked questions while pausing between writing and stared at them, making them uncomfortable while questioning the relevance to their symptoms.
Moodley has denied all claims of sexualized comments and inappropriate behaviour.
LAST WITNESS
Robert Cooke, one of the two lawyers for Moodley, called Dr. Christian Adam as an expert witness in regards to Moodley's conduct during an internal exam of one of two women who filed complaints with the college after their exams in July 2017.
During the questioning, Adam, an obstetrician-gynecologist who practises in Fredericton and is affiliated with Dalhousie and Memorial universities as an instructor, verified the use of lubricant during Pap smear exams and the application by the physician by hand is taught by some medical schools and the technique is used by some gynecologists.
"The idea is you want to try and minimize the discomfort during this examination," said Adam, a gynecologist and family practitioner who has been practicing in Canada for more than 30 years.
"The patient is understandably nervous...And so it's something you want to try and do as comfortably as possible. So that's the idea behind the lubricant."
Based on his testimony, the lawyer for the college said they were dropping the complaint made by one woman of Moodley's conducting her Pap exams in a "sexualized manner."
However, Marjorie Hickey, a lawyer representing the Nova Scotia College of Physicians and Surgeons, said based on Adam's testimony it appeared Moodley didn't get the consent needed to apply the lubricant to the vaginal wall of A.B.
"(In Dr. Adam's testimony he confirmed) a greater amount of touching requires a greater need for consent. The college believes consent was not given," said Hickey while reviewing evidence presented.
A.B. testified Moodley said he would apply lubricant to the introitus — a term she'd never heard before and believed was in reference to a tool.
"The onus is on the physician to start with the usage of terms that are understandable to the patient," said Hickey in her closing arguments. "This was the problem here."
The college also decided to stop pursuing a complaint made by C.D. in relation to the extent to which Moodley discussed her medical issue. However, Hickey made it clear the college believed the other five complaints made by C.D. did seem truthful and did indicate professional misconduct.
MOTIVATIONS, SIMILARITIES
While reviewing the evidence presented on behalf of the college, Hickey stressed the similarities of the A.B. and C.D.'s complaints and questioned what motivation either might have in coming forward.
For both complainants, Hickey pointed to nothing seeming to be "exaggerated" or embellished in their testimonies noting when C.D. pointed out a mistake she made when filing her complaint.
C.D. said during her testimony she'd mistakenly said Moodley asked her to pull her pants down before a pelvic ultrasound when it happened before a request for an internal exam which C.D. avoided by saying she was menstruating.
"If (C.D.) wasn't telling the truth, at this hearing she would have maintained (her first account)," Hickey said. "This suggests she was being truthful."
Other similarities between the two complainants included Moodley allegedly complimenting them on an aspect of their appearance, making sexualized comments while staring "in their eyes" and asking personal questions not related to their symptoms.
Hickey also said both women came forward quickly, wanted to file complaints to protect other females and won't benefit from filing these complaints.
"They have no motivation to come forward with these complaints," she said. "They've had serious accusations thrown at them — racism, collusion, perjury — (which have hurt them and their families.)"
Postponed since March 31 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the closed hearing resumed at the offices of McInnes Cooper who are representing the college. A limited number of people were allowed to attend the closed hearing due to public health measures still in place. Media were invited to attend virtually.
The hearing resumes Thursday with Moodley's lawyers presenting their closing arguments.
