Previous Hearings
Committee: Discipline
Decision Date: 15 Apr 2020
Summary:
On April 15, 2020, on the basis of agreed facts and admission, the Discipline Committee
(the “Committee”) of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario found that Dr.
Fernand Gaston Vincent Nadon (“Dr. Nadon”) committed an act of professional
misconduct. The Committee set out its penalty and costs order with written reasons to
follow.
FACTS
Background
Dr. Nadon is a 58 year-old physician who received his certificate of registration
authorizing independent practice from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of
Ontario (“the College) on September 17, 1986.
At the relevant time, Dr. Nadon practised at the University of Ottawa Health Services in
Ottawa, Ontario.
On May 16, 2018, the ICRC directed the Registrar to suspend Dr. Nadon’s certificate of
registration, without notice, under s. 25.4(7) of the Health Professions Procedural Code,
which is Schedule 2 to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991.
In January 2018, Dr. Nadon was charged with sexual assault and voyeurism after one of
his patients complained that he made a video recording of her clinical appointment with
him, without her consent, using his personal mobile phone during a medical exam at the
University of Ottawa Health Services. The patient alleged that she had watched a
recording that Dr. Nadon made of her entire appointment including her disrobing in the
room alone and her physical examination (including her breasts and vagina). The
appointment was for the patient's pap smear screening procedure. Immediately after
the appointment, the female patient notified the receptionist and a nurse about her
concerns.
The office manager spoke with Dr. Nadon in the evening of January 16, 2018. He
admitted to video recording the clinical procedure of the patient without her consent on
his personal phone, but advised that he did it for future teaching purposes. He told staff
that he deleted the video recording in front of the patient and did not keep a copy.
The female patient reported the matter to the Ottawa police. Dr. Nadon was arrested on
January 18, 2018 and charged with one count of sexual assault and voyeurism.
Subsequent to a news release, additional patients came forward to the Ottawa Police
alleging that they too felt that they had been surreptitiously videotaped during their
interactions with Dr. Nadon. Dr. Nadon was removed from his position at the University
of Ottawa Clinics. Dr. Nadon was charged with 94 charges of voyeurism and sexual
assault involving 51 victims.
On December 5, 2018, Dr. Nadon pleaded guilty to 14 counts of voyeurism and sexual
assault relating to 49 victims. He pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting 21 victims, and to
voyeurism in relation to 38 victims. All of the victims were his patients.
The facts admitted by Dr. Nadon in the criminal proceeding are admitted by him in this
proceeding as well. These included the following facts:
The accused, Vincent Nadon, is a medical doctor who at the relevant time
maintained a family medicine, travel medicine and immigration medicine practice
with the University of Ottawa Health Services. Many of the victims identified
below were recent immigrants to Canada
In January 2018, Patient A. attended at the University of Ottawa Health
Services Clinic located at 316 Rideau Street. Patient A was seen by the
accused, Vincent Nadon, in an examination room at the clinic where she
had a reasonable expectation of privacy and where she could reasonably
be expected to expose her genital organs, anal region or breasts. The
accused, Vincent Nadon, conducted a physical examination of Patient A
which included a breast examination and a Pap test, which were
performed for a sexual purpose, without the consent of Patient A The
accused, Vincent Nadon, surreptitiously video recorded Patient A in the
examination room with an iPhone hidden in a cabinet. The video recording
captured the physical examination during which Patient A’s breasts were
exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in the
examination room. The video recording made by the accused, Vincent
Nadon, did not serve the public good, which relates to a possible defence
in the Criminal Code.
After Patient A was dressed, she noticed the phone and picked it up and
examined it. She observed it was recording. She stopped the recording
and reviewed the video which began with Mr. Nadon placing the phone in
the cabinet. Patient A confronted Nadon with the phone. He initially denied
that it was recording. After unlocking the phone and viewing the video he
apologized and stated that he sometimes recorded exams for training
purposes. When Patient A asked why she had not been advised of this in
advance in order to provide consent, Nadon agreed, apologized and
deleted the video in front of her.
The following day, Nadon was observed leaving his residence and driving
to the vacant parking lot at the FreshMart in Chelsea, Quebec. At 2301
hours he was observed placing a black garbage bag into the garbage
dumpster. The garbage bag contained a computer hard drive broken in
two pieces. The hard drive had been damaged and no data was able to be
retrieved from it.
A search warrant was subsequently executed by the Ottawa Police at the
residence of Vincent Nadon. A computer hard drive was seized from the office
area of the home and examined. The examination revealed 42 videos that had
been copied from an iPhone and then deleted.
At the University of Ottawa Health Services the accused, Vincent Nadon, would see and
examine patients in clinic examination rooms. When in those clinic examination rooms,
patients had a reasonable expectation of privacy. When in clinic examination rooms,
these patients were in a place where they could reasonably be expected to expose their
genital organs, anal region or breasts. Between January 2010 and August 2011 the
accused, Vincent Nadon, surreptitiously made video recordings of the following patients
while they were in examination rooms at the University of Ottawa Health Services Clinic
located at 100 Marie Curie Private:
Patient B. In January 2010 the video captured the physical examination during
which Patient B’s breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing
and dressing in the examination room.
Patient C. In January 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
Patient C's breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and
dressing in the examination room.
Patient D. In January 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
Patient D.'s breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and
dressing in the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that
would cause her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient E. In January 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
Patient E's breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and
dressing in the examination room.
Patient F. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
Patient F's breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and
dressing in the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that
would cause her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient G. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
Patient G's breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and
dressing in the examination room.
Patient H. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient I. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient J. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient K. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient L. In February 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient M. In March 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient N. In March 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient O. In March 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient P. In March 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would cause
her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient Q. In June 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would cause
her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient R. In June 2010, capturing the physical examination during which Patient
R's breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her dressing in the
examination room.
Patient S. In June 2010, capturing the physical examination during which Patient
S.'s breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient T. In July 2010, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would cause
her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient U. In July 2010, capturing her dressing in the examination room.
Patient V. In September 2010, capturing her undressing in the examination room.
Patient W. In September 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient X. In September 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would
cause her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient Y. In November 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would
cause her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient Z. In November 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would
cause her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient AA. In November 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient BB. In November 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient CC. In November 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera.
Patient DD. In December 2010, capturing her getting dressed in the examination
room.
Patient EE. In December 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would
cause her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient FF. In December 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient GG. In December 2010, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient HH. In January 2011, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room. Nadon moved her clothing to a location that would cause
her to get dressed in view of the camera.
Patient II. In February 2011, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing in the
examination room.
Patient JJ. In February 2011, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient KK. In February 2011, capturing the physical examination during which
her breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing
in the examination room.
Patient LL. In March 2011, capturing her dressing in the examination room.
Patient MM. In March 2011, capturing the physical examination during which her
breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and dressing in
the examination room.
Patient NN. In June 2011, capturing the physical examination during which
Patient NN's breasts were exposed to the camera as well as her undressing and
dressing in the examination room.
Patient OO. In August 2011, capturing her getting dressed in the examination
room.
Between January 2010 and February 2011, the accused, Vincent Nadon, conducted
physical examinations on the following patients at the University of Ottawa Health
Services Clinic located at 316 Rideau Street.
Patient PP. In January 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, touched
her breasts for a sexual purpose without her consent, by reaching from behind
and cupping both breasts at once.
Patient QQ. In January 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon,
commenced a Pap test with only one hand gloved, then proceeded to remove
that glove and reinserted his gloveless hand into the patient’s vagina, after first
putting his fingers to his nose/mouth area, all for a sexual purpose and without
the patient’s consent. At the end of the examination he made a no - noise near
the garbage can as though he were removing gloves and discarding them.
Patient RR. In February 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, touched
her left breast for a sexual purpose and without her consent.
Patient SS. In February 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, touched
her breast by reaching from behind and cupping both breasts at once, as well as
commenced a Pap test with only one hand gloved, proceeded to remove that
glove and then reinserted his gloveless hand into the patient’s vagina after first
putting his fingers to his nose/mouth area, all for a sexual purpose and without
the patient’s consent. At the end of the examination he made a noise near the
garbage can as though he were removing gloves and discarding them.
Patient TT. In February 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon,
performed a Pap test with only one hand gloved, which was for a sexual purpose
and without the patient’s consent. At the end of the examination he made a noise
near the garbage can as though he were removing two gloves and discarding
them.
Patient UU, In March 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, performed
a Pap test with only hand gloved, which was for a sexual purpose, and without
the patient's consent.
Patient VV. In March 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, performed
a Pap test with only one hand gloved, which was for a sexual purpose and
without the patient’s consent.
Patient WW. In March 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, touched
her breasts by pushing them together and performed a Pap test with only one
hand gloved, all of which was for a sexual purpose and without the patient’s
consent.
Patient XX. In November 2010, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon,
touched her breasts for a sexual purpose and without her consent. Nadon
reached from behind and touched both breasts at once in a groping manner and
pinched both nipples. He moved the patient’s face to the camera, had her bend
over and shake her breasts and then he said, “marvelous”.
Patient YY. In February 2011, at which time the accused, Vincent Nadon, touched
her breasts for a sexual purpose without her consent.
As a result of the initial charges laid in relation to the complainant, Patient A, a media
release was issued and a number of other victims came forward, including the following
victims:
Patient ZZ. Between November 1990 and July 2002 Patient ZZ attended at the
University of Ottawa Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie Private
where she was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon. The accused, Mr. Nadon,
conducted an examination during which he touched Patient ZZ's breasts for a
sexual purpose and without her consent.
Patient AAA. Between October 1992 and November 1993 Patient AAA attended
at the University of Ottawa Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie
Private where she was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon. The accused, Mr.
Nadon, conducted vaginal examinations without gloves and breast examinations
during which he shook her breasts and pinched her nipples and made
inappropriate comments about her breasts, all for a sexual purpose and without
her consent.
Patient BBB. In February 1993 Patient BBB attended at the University of Ottawa
Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie Private for a referral to a
psychologist. She was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon, in an examination
room at the clinic. After asking Patient BBB to disrobe, the accused, Vincent
Nadon, conducted a medically unnecessary physical examination of Patient BBB
during which he touched her naked body. He touched her body for a sexual
purpose without her consent.
Patient CCC. In June 1995 Patient CCC attended at the University of Ottawa
Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie Private where she was seen by
the accused, Vincent Nadon, in an examination room at the clinic. Vincent Nadon
conducted a breast examination of Patient CCC during which he grabbed and
pinched her nipples for a sexual purpose without her consent.
Patient DDD. In March 1997 Patient DDD attended at the University of Ottawa
Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie Private for an immigration
physical where she was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon. The accused,
Vincent Nadon, conducted a physical examination of Patient DDD which included
an internal vaginal examination which was medically unnecessary and performed
for a sexual purpose without her consent.
Patient EEE. Between January 1999 and December 2004 Patient EEE attended at
the University of Ottawa Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie Private
where she was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon. During the procedure to
remove a genital wart, the accused, Vincent Nadon, touched her genital area for a
sexual purpose and without her consent.
Patient FFF. In September 2012 Patient FFF attended at the University of Ottawa
Health Services Clinic located at 100 Marie Curie Private where she was seen by
the accused, Vincent Nadon, in an examination room. The accused, Vincent
Nadon, conducted a vaginal examination during which he touched her clitoris for
a sexual purpose, without the consent of Patient FFF.
Patient GGG. In May 2013 Patient GGG attended at the University of Ottawa
Health Services Clinic where she was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon.
Vincent Nadon stared at Patient GGG's naked body and asked her inappropriate
questions about her sexual history while he conducted a physical exam for a
sexual purpose and without the consent of Patient GGG. At the completion of the
exam he remained in the examination room while Patient GGG got dressed and
told her, “It’s fine. I see parts of you that you'll never see.”
Patient HHH. In May 2015 Patient HHH attended the University of Ottawa Health
Services Clinic where she was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon. Vincent
Nadon touched Patient HHH's breasts for a sexual purpose, without the consent
of Patient HHH.
Patient III. In August 2017 Patient III attended at the University of Ottawa Health
Services Clinic located at 316 Rideau Street with the complaint of sore ribs. She
was seen by the accused, Vincent Nadon, in an examination room at the clinic.
Patient III. lifted the side of her shirt for her ribs to be examined. After feeling her
ribs, without forewarning or consent, the accused, Vincent Nadon, groped both of
Patient III's breasts over her bra. The accused, Vincent Nadon, touched her
breasts for a sexual purpose without her consent.
Dr. Nadon’s criminal sentence included a global sentence of eight (8) years in jail (seven
to be served after sentencing, given time spent in pre-trial custody).
At sentencing, Dr. Nadon’s lawyer submitted that Dr. Nadon “will undoubtedly see his
licence revoked once the College finishes with their process” as a result of his “gross
breach of trust … over a lengthy period of time”. In his reasons for sentence, the judge
agreed that Dr. Nadon’s breach of trust was “egregious” and noted that “the conviction
will most likely strip you of your licence to ever practice any kind of medicine ever again.
Dr. Nadon does not contest the facts specified above, and does not contest that, based
on these facts, he engaged in professional misconduct, in that:
(a) he engaged in sexual abuse of a patient, under clause 51(1)(b.1) of the Health
Professions Procedural Code ;
(b) he engaged in an act or omission relevant to the practice of medicine that,
having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by
members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, under paragraph
1(1)33 of Ontario Regulation 856/93, made under the Medicine Act, 1991
(“O/Reg. 856/93”); and
(c) he has been found guilty of an offence that is relevant to his suitability to
practise, under clause 51(1)(a) of the Code.
FINDING
The Committee found that Dr. Nadon committed an act of professional misconduct
under:
(i) clause 51(1)(b.1) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, which is
Schedule 2 of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, in that he
sexually abused a patient.
(ii) paragraph 1(1)33 of Ontario Regulation 856/93 made under the Medicine
Act, 1991, in that he has engaged in an act or omission relevant to the
practice of medicine that, having regarding to all the circumstances, would
reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or
unprofessional.
(iii) clause 51(1)(a) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, which is
Schedule 2 of the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, in that he has
been found guilty of an offence relevant to his suitability to practice.
PENALTY AND COSTS
The Discipline Committee ordered Dr. Nadon to attend before the panel to be
reprimanded.
The Discipline Committee directed the Registrar to revoke Dr. Nadon’s certificate of
registration effective immediately.
The Discipline Committee ordered Dr. Nadon to reimburse the College for funding
provided to patients under the program required under section 85.7 of the Code, by
posting an irrevocable letter of credit or other security acceptable to the College, within
thirty (30) days of this Order in the amount of $786,940.00 ($16,060.00 per 49 patients).
The Discipline Committee ordered Dr. Nadon to pay costs to the College in the amount
of $6000.00 within 30 days of the date of the Order.
DECISION AND REASONS
On July 14, 2020, the Committee released its Decision and Reasons in this matter. The
full document is available for view on the College’s website.
Decision: Download Full Decision (PDF)
Hearing Date(s): April 15, 2020