Dr Edward Gonzales-Gomez (pictured) has been cleared of sexually-motivated conduct
A family doctor accused of fondling a trucker’s private parts during a medical exam has been cleared of sexual misconduct after a tribunal ruled that the patient had a ‘negative perception’ of homosexuality.
The tribunal heard Dr Edward Gonzales-Gomez, 46, was accused of touching the Portuguese man’s penis after being asked to to provide a medical report about him for the DVLA and Transport for London.
During the consultation at the Monteiro Clinic, in Clapham, south London, GP Gonzales-Gomez was alleged to have examined the 49-year old patient’s prostate for 10 minutes without saying why he was doing so.
The man, known as Patient A, later visited a Boots Pharmacy in Peckham, south east London, where he told a male pharmacist what happened and was advised to make a complaint.
He also told his brother and niece about the consultation with the doctor in June 2015.
But, to the detriment of his claim, the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service was told Patient A said to his friend that the GP seemed ‘a little bit gay’ and made negative comments about his sexuality.
In a statement detailing his complaint, the lorry driver said: ‘A man is supposed to feel attraction to a woman and not by a man.
‘My aim is to guide the idea of only those who are attracted to a man is a woman, which is natural or normal.
‘In the case that this is a man, it is an abuse.’
Columbia-born Gonzales-Gomez, who has almost 17 years’ experience practising medicine in Britain, said he could not recall the consultation but said a rectal examination would have been ‘necessary.’
At the Manchester hearing chairman Jayne Wheat said the series of misconduct charges against him could not be proved.
She told the GP: ‘During his evidence Patient A remained broadly consistent and did his best to assist the tribunal and he was considered to be a sincere witness who genuinely believed that the consultation took place as he described.
‘The tribunal felt his distress upon completing his evidence to be genuine.
‘However, there were areas of inconsistency which the tribunal found to significantly undermine his account.
‘In a conversation shortly after his consultation he told his friend that you presented as being ‘a little gay’ and that his friend agreed and it was clear from statements that Patient A had a very strong personal opinion regarding homosexuality.
‘He described that “man supposed to feel attraction to a woman and not by a man” and in his statement Patient A said that his aim was “to guide the idea of only those who are attracted to a man is a woman, which is natural or normal. In the case that this is a man, it is an abuse.”
Dr Gonzales-Gomez (pictured outside his Manchester hearing) was accused of touching his Portuguese patient’s penis and spending too long examining his prostate without explaining why he was doing so. He was cleared of sexually-motivated misconduct because of the man’s ‘negative comments’ about homosexuality, which the tribunal ruled undermined his claim
‘These statements clearly displayed Patient A’s negative perception of homosexuality.’
She continued: ‘The tribunal found that shortly after the consultation, Patient A concluded you were homosexual and the tribunal considered it likely that he had exaggerated his perception of the procedure.
‘He allowed his personal views to colour his memory of events to such an extent that the tribunal was unable to place reliance upon his evidence in relation to the procedure.’
The alleged encounter occurred when the Portuguese man, who spoke little English, attended the Monteiro Clinic to get a medical assessment for his ‘Group Two’ licence which would enable him to drive lorries or buses in the UK.
He told the Manchester hearing: ‘I remember Dr Gonzalez-Gomez asking me some basic questions like if I was diabetic.
‘He also took my blood pressure and weighed me and then I remember Dr Gonzalez-Gomez asking whether I have ever had a prostate exam before.
‘I said yes and he asked how long ago. I told Dr Gonzalez-Gomez that my GP had said that I should have a blood test next time and not the physical prostate exam.
‘But Dr Gonzalez-Gomez said that blood tests were not enough to check for prostate cancer and that it is still best to do an exam.
‘My niece is a doctor in Brazil and she has also said this to me in the past so I agreed with Dr Gonzalez-Gomez and said I would have the exam.
‘After examining my penis and stomach, Dr Gonzalez-Gomez then asked me to bend my knees upwards, in the same kind of position that a woman would have a pelvic exam.
‘The first time that I had a prostate exam I did feel uncomfortable and vulnerable because I didn’t know what to expect but this time I felt fine about having it done.
‘However, at no point did Dr Gonzalez Gomez explain to me what he was going to do.
‘Dr Gonzalez-Gomez didn’t say anything to me during the exam.’
The alleged encounter occurred in June 2015 when the Portuguese man attended the Monteiro Clinic (pictured) in Clapham, south London, to get a medical assessment
He continued: ‘I felt that Dr Gonzalez-Gomez had been very calm up until this point and he then became agitated, in a rush and uncomfortable.
‘He then replied “just a little bit more”.
Patient A claimed that after the encounter he did some internet research on how long a prostate exam should take.
Police were alerted but took no action against the doctor.
Gonzales-Gomez, of Hackney, east London, who denied wrongdoing throughout said: ‘I don’t remember the specific consultation.
‘I saw 34 patients that day and two had prostate examinations.
‘But Patient A came to get the two forms completed by a doctor and although I have no recollection of what he told me at all during the consultation, I would have been reliant on what he told me about his history.
‘Usually I would use slides to show where the prostate is, explain that it’s uncomfortable but only lasts a few seconds.
‘I would usually offer a chaperone and would always use the screen. I would not be handling the penis.
‘I don’t remember whether I did or not offer a chaperone. There was no chaperone in the room and I didn’t record anything about a chaperone.
‘I don’t remember the patient saying he was in pain and asking how long it would take.
‘I don’t regularly do rectal examinations when people are there for taxi driver forms to be filled out – it would be very rare. I have no recollection of what Patient A said or why I did one.
‘Patient A may say I handled his penis but I have no recollection of it.
‘There was no issue when I examined the prostate – there was no reason this should have taken more than seconds – it would be at the most 10 seconds unless I was not sure about something.
‘My actions towards this patient was not sexually motivated, it was a perfectly normal consultation there was no pain or discomfort.
‘It was a busy afternoon, I had to complete two forms that are quite long. I always allow the patient to have some privacy.’
Gonzales-Gomez was found guilty on the charges of failing to record details of the meeting and failing to offer the patient a chaperone.
He was cleared of sexually-motivated conduct.
His case was adjourned for a further hearing in December.