A WA GP has been banned from practising for 25 years for sexual misconduct and poor performance.
The WA State Administrative Tribunal cancelled the medical registration of Dr Lucian Edouard Lagrange for 25 years on 22 November 2022 and ordered him to pay costs to the Medical Board of Australia (MBA) of almost $76,000 following findings of professional misconduct spanning from the 1980s to 2019.
The tribunal’s decision not only prohibits Dr Lagrange from using the honorific title ‘doctor’, but also bans him from providing health services for the next 25 years.
Dr Lagrange has not practised since 2 September 2019, when the MBA took immediate action to suspend his medical registration, stating that it reasonably believed that because of his conduct, Dr Lagrange posed “a serious risk to persons and it is necessary to take immediate action to protect public health or safety.”
The allegations against Dr Lagrange involved three separate cases brought by female patients, including breaching professional boundaries by having sex with a patient; inappropriately touching another patient; and asking to visit another patient he thought was a sex worker.
The Board referred Dr Lagrange to the Tribunal regarding eight counts of professional misconduct, including that he:
- had sex with a patient in her home on five different occasions during the 1980s and 1990s
- inappropriately touched a second patient during a consultation in early 2019 (cupping her breast and nipple during a skin check), and
- committed boundary transgressions, failed to take a proper history, failed to order necessary tests, failed to prescribe appropriate medication, failed to discuss appropriate follow-up action, and failed to make adequate clinical notes for the third patient in August 2019.
On 17 December 2021, the tribunal stated that “…by his conduct, Dr Lagrange abused the doctor-patient relationship and undermined the trust and confidence of patients, particularly women, in their doctors and of the community in the medical profession, in fundamental breach of his ethical duties and obligations under the Code and Guidelines.”
The tribunal found Dr Lagrange engaged in eight counts of professional misconduct with the first two patients – and professional misconduct, unsatisfactory professional performance, and unprofessional conduct with regards to the third.
“We have no confidence that Dr Lagrange will ever be fit to practice in the future,” the Tribunal concluded.
The Tribunal noted that Dr Lagrange had a significant disciplinary record relating to incidents that had occurred between 1991 to 2017, which had already resulted in his registration being revoked for two years in December 1994, for 12 months in May 2002, and for nine months in August 2002.
He would have had his registration revoked for a fourth time in December 2002, had it not already been revoked at the time.
Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency CEO, Mr Martin Fletcher, said that the penalty handed down to Dr Lagrange was one of the most severe outcomes ever imposed on a practitioner in Australia.
“The quarter of a century disqualification demonstrates the gravity of misconduct these patients were subjected to,” Mr Fletcher said.
“I hope the tribunal’s decision offers some closure to the women directly involved, as well as sending a strong message to the wider public about the standards in place to protect their safety.”
Dr Lagrange, who turned 72 this year, announced his intent to retire on 30 September 2019, in a letter submitted to AHPRA by his solicitor, dated 27 August 2019, and given his age, the Tribunal believed that the penalty imposed this November will prevent him from ever practicing again.
The decision coincided with this month’s launch of AHPRA’s 2021/2022 annual report, Supporting access to safe and professional healthcare, which showed that allegations of misconduct were on the rise, with 344 referrals made to the Tribunal that year, compared to 180 in 2020/2021.
The tribunal finalised 191 cases that year and of the 187 allegations of professional misconduct brought against some 109 practitioners, 98.4% resulted in disciplinary action.
Matters included findings of professional misconduct involving:
- family violence offending and other serious criminal offending
- sexual boundary breaches and other general boundary breaches, such as inappropriate relationships with patients
- misappropriating or prescribing of peptides or other drugs that are at risk of misuse/abuse, for non-therapeutic purposes
- failure to comply with conditions imposed on registration by a Board or a panel
- inappropriate commentary on social media
- dishonest and/or misleading conduct including during an AHPRA investigation and/or at renewal of registration
- practising while unregistered and failing to hold appropriate professional indemnity insurance
- inadequate clinical management and/or medical mismanagement
- issuing vaccination exemptions not in accordance with legislation.
Significant periods of disqualification were imposed in some matters, including in matters involving:
- inappropriate sexual contact and unlawful sexual assault (conviction) and inappropriate sexual comments made to a patient (7.5 years)
- failing to comply with conditions imposed on registration, stalking and/or intimidating a female neighbour and conviction of disturbing the public peace (3 years)
- misappropriating medication as a pharmacist, failing to hold professional indemnity insurance for a period and convictions related to altering a prescription, unlawful possession of Alprazolam, using a Schedule 8 poison for self-administration without prescription and altering records (1 year).
Medical Board of Australia Chair Anne Tonkin said that women should expect to feel safe when they consult their doctor.
“Patients trust doctors to act in their best interests, treat them professionally, protect their privacy and never take advantage of them,” Ms Tonkin said.
“While the vast majority of doctors in Australia provide the community with excellent medical care, a small number of doctors undermine patient trust when they do not maintain sexual boundaries. In these cases, the Board will take the necessary action to protect the public.”