In July, found Strathfield GP Dr Peter Alexakis had failed to observe professional boundaries with two palliative care specialists treating one of his patients,had inappropriately prescribed highly addictive drugs to another patient,and had failed to keep appropriate patient records in both cases.
On Friday,the tribunal issued reprimanding Alexakis and imposing more than a dozen conditions on his registration.
A Sydney GP who fought the Salvation Army in court to claim $24 million from a lonely patient’s estate can continue practicing medicine despite a tribunal finding him guilty of professional misconduct and reprimanding him for his “suspicious...
The decision follows the last month that upheld Alexakis’ claim to 90 per cent of the $27 million estate of former property developer Raymond McClure.
The appeal was launched by the Salvation Army and two of McClure’s friends,who were the beneficiaries of his will before McClure altered it to give his $3 million home in Strathfield and the bulk of his remaining fortune to Alexakis,his GP of three years.
The will was amended by Alexakis’ family lawyer three months before McClure’s death.
In bringing the action,the Health Care Complaints Commission said Alexakis posed an unacceptable risk to the public and that his registration should be cancelled or suspended.
The tribunal upheld five complaints but chose not to cancel or suspend Alexakis’ registration,concluding he was unlikely to repeat the conduct and that placing conditions on his registration “would adequately protect the health and safety of the public”.
The tribunal said the court proceedings had been a “harrowing experience” for Alexakis and that they had “opened his eyes” to the gravity of his conduct,particularly the consequences of prescribing addictive drugs.
“The paramount consideration is the health and safety of the public,” the tribunal said in its decision. “Realistically,having regard to his age,and the professional development which[Alexakis] has undertaken in the past six and a half years,little purpose would be served in suspending his registration.”
Referring to McClure anonymously as “patient B” – it is HCCC practice not to identify patients – the tribunal found Alexakis breached professional boundaries with two specialists involved in McClure’s palliative care. Still,it concluded Alexakis’ behaviour arose from his “misguided concern” for the patient’s welfare.
The HCCC alleged Alexakis visited McClure 92 times in the months leading up to his death,establishing a friendship in order to exploit him for financial gain.
The tribunal concluded the evidence did not prove Alexakis’ conduct was “motivated by any personal benefit” and that it could not and should not speculate on whether he would benefit from the estate.
Alexakis inherited another former patient’s entire estate,worth $86,380,in 2014,but the Court of Appeal could not be satisfied he knew about that will’s contents.
Under the restrictions enforced by the tribunal,Alexakis cannot possess or prescribe any schedule 8 “drug of addiction”;he is barred from visiting patients in their home or nursing home;and he must complete courses on ethical decision-making and palliative care treatment.
He must appoint another GP to be his mentor,practise in a clinic with at least two other registered medical practitioners and he cannot treat more than 36 patients a day.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories,analysis and insights..