Patient Alleges Indecent Assault by Paediatrician During Admission
SingTao · 1 SOURCESabout 1 hour ago2 MIN
Summary
A man identified by the pseudonym Peter said he sought treatment in April 2021 after suddenly developing severe dizziness and was admitted to a private hospital through arrangements made by a male doctor he had known for more than a decade through the same Christian fellowship. Peter alleged that although the doctor was a paediatrician, the doctor personally followed up his case and, without a nurse present, twice asked him to remove his trousers to examine his genital area on the stated ground of checking lymph nodes. Peter said he later suspected he had been indecently assaulted, confronted the doctor, and then filed complaints with the Medical Council, the Equal Opportunities Commission and police. The doctor declined interviews, saying the matter was already under Medical Council investigation and suggesting the complaint might stem from the complainant's imagination and smearing, while police said there was insufficient evidence for arrest or prosecution
Key Points
- Peter said he posted about his dizziness in a fellowship group, after which the male doctor called offering help and arranged his admission to a private hospital in April 2021
- He alleged the doctor first conducted a general examination, then, with no nurse present, asked him to remove his trousers to check lymph nodes and manipulated his foreskin after noticing an erection
- Peter said the doctor also praised his looks during consultation and, while examining his waist, repeatedly let his arm touch Peter's penis, leaving him feeling offended and suspicious
- According to Peter, the doctor repeated a genital examination the following night after MRI and other tests, again citing lymph nodes and again touching his penis while checking his waist
- Peter later discharged himself, sought treatment from an ear, nose and throat specialist for the dizziness, and said the Medical Council had made five allegations, including misconduct and allegedly falsifying records
Why It Matters
The case raises questions for Hong Kong patients about consent, clinical necessity and the presence of chaperones during intimate examinations, especially when treatment falls outside a doctor's usual specialty. It also shows the limits of parallel complaint channels, with the Medical Council, Equal Opportunities Commission and police each handling the matter under different standards and confidentiality rules