BOSQUE UNIVERSITY COLOMBIAN MEDICAL SCHOOL, BOGATÁ, COLOMBIA
#ETHN
- 5/14/2020—CALIFORNIA MEDICAL LICENSE REVOKED, EFFECTIVE 6/12/2020.
- 3/06/2020—RECOMMENDATION BY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE.
- 6/28/2018—ACCUSATION FILED.
- 5/30/2018—FULL INTERIM SUSPENSION ORDER ISSUED-NO PRACTICE.
Excerpt from Accusation dated 6/28/2018:
FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Gross Negligence)
6. Respondent Guillermo Andres Cortes, M.D. is subject to disciplinary action under section 2234, subdivision (b), in that he sexually assaulted three different women with whom he worked at the University of Southern California (USC). The circumstances are as follows:
Allegations Regarding Victim #1:
A. Victim #1 is a second-year fellow in the Cardiology training program at USC. She attended medical school at USC and graduated with her medical degree in 2013. From June 2013 to June 2016, she was an Internal Medicine resident at Keck Medicine of USC. In December 2015 she was matched with USC Keck Cardiology Fellowship.
B. In November 2015, Respondent was a second-year Interventional Cardiology Fellow at USC Keck. He was in a supervisory position to Victim #1 and oftentimes her direct supervisor. She was a third-year resident in the Department of Internal Medicine.
C. On or about November 17, 2015, Victim #1 was working on the Nephrology Consult Service and needed to discuss a patient with Respondent. He was in the Progressive Care Unit and she went to talk to him. Respondent led her to the Cardiology Fellow Call Room.
D. This particular call room is small, it has no windows, but has a twin bed and a small desk with a computer. They met in that room to discus the patient, but when Victim #1 tried to leave the room, Respondent blocked her exit and put his hand on the door so she could not get out. He placed his hand on her buttock but she told him to stop and could not believe he was doing this. He grabbed her arms, leaned into her and forced his tongue into her mouth. She tried to get free and repeatedly told him to stop but he ignored her. Victim #1 was trying to duck but could not get away.
E. Respondent then untied her scrub pants and forced his hand down into her underwear and inserted his finger into her vagina; she did not give him permission or consent to do so. Victim #1 had to ask him two times to remove his hand and he refused to do so. He moved his finger back and forth and she could not believe this was happening. He continued to force his tongue into her mouth. Victim #1 was begging him to stop. After what seemed like several minutes of struggling with him, Respondent unblocked her path and she ran out of the room.
F. Victim #1 did not scream because Respondent is physically so much bigger than she is, and she was afraid he would hurt her even more. She was afraid for her safety.
G. Victim #1 immediately texted her friend, Dr. T., and asked if she could come talk to her. Victim #1 told Dr. T. about the incident and Dr. T. told her to report it but Victim # 1 was afraid of retaliation.
H. On approximately November 18, 2015, Victim #1 talked to Respondent on the phone and told him never to touch her again and that when she told him to stop, he should have listened to her. On November 18, 2015, Respondent paged her and claimed he felt bad and said, "please don't tell anyone... I have worked very hard to get here, please don't tell anyone." Victim #1 did not respond.
I. In February 2016, victim #1 met with Dr. E.H., who, at the time, was the Internal Medicine Residency Program Director at USC Keck. She reported the sexual assault to him. She asked him not to schedule her with Respondent unless it was an emergency situation. Victim #1 wanted to make sure she was safe. Unfortunately, her request was ignored and there were two occasions when she was forced to work with Respondent.
J. Sometime in February 2016, Respondent was placed on leave.
K. In February 2016, victim #1 spoke with Dr. S. (Director of the General Cardiovascular Fellowship Training Program at USC) to report the sexual assault but he did not want to hear about it. During one of their calls he said "you knew what you were doing," and "now I have to tell all the fellows about it."
Allegations regarding Victim #2:
L. Victim #2 is a physician, licensed in California in 2016. She was doing her internal residency at County USC Hospital when she met Respondent, sometime in the fall of 2014. She and Respondent never dated, and Victim #2 made it very clear to him that she just wanted to be friends. She thought Respondent understood, but was not sure it was mutual.
M. In January 2015, Respondent and Victim #2 made plans to get together to go swim at Respondent's pool. Victim #2 had plans later that night to go out to dinner with her friend Mr. G., so she just planned on going to Respondent's place for a few hours.
N. When Victim #2 arrived at Respondent's apartment, he made them margaritas, then they went down to the pool to swim. When Victim #2 and Respondent came back up to his apartment awhile later, Respondent made them two more drinks and emptied the bottle of tequila. When they went back down to the pool, he tried to kiss Victim #2 who pushed him away.
O. Victim #2 became very intoxicated. When Victim #2 and Respondent returned to his apartment, Victim #2 awoke to Respondent being on top of her. Her bikini top was on but her bikini bottoms and shorts were off, and Respondent's penis was inside of her. Respondent penetrated Victim #2, without her consent.
P. Respondent got up to use the restroom and it was Victim #2's chance to escape. Victim #2 got dressed quickly and ran out of Respondent's apartment. Respondent caught up with Victim #2 in the hallway, they got into the elevator, and once Respondent got in, Victim #2 got out and ran down the stairwell. Victim #2 ran into the street and was walking towards an underpass which had a lot of homeless people and Victim #2 was fearful to walk through it. Respondent caught up with Victim #2, driving in his car next to her. Victim #2 thought it would be safer to get in the car with Respondent rather than walk under the underpass. Respondent dropped Victim #2 off at her apartment. Victim #2 yelled at Respondent that she never wanted to have sexual intercourse. Victim #2 slammed the car door and ran into her apartment.
Q. Victim #2 was supposed to meet her friend Mr. G. for dinner, and when she arrived home she saw that he had called her several times. Victim #2 called Mr. G. crying hysterically and told him what happened.
R. Since the January 2015 incident, Victim #2 has only spoken to Respondent a few times. Victim #2 reported the incident to the police.
Allegations Regarding Victim #3:
S. Victim #3 is currently in the second year of her Cardiology Fellowship at USC Keck.
T. Victim #3 first met Respondent when she started her fellowship in the summer of 2016. Victim #3 was a first year fellow and Respondent was in his third year of the fellowship. First year fellows are mentored and supervised by third year fellows in the program. Respondent served in a supervisory role over Victim #3.
U. Respondent is also the half-brother of Dr. L.C. Dr. L.C. is the Interventiona1 Cardiology Program Director at USC. This is a position of significant authority and influence at USC and in the Cardiology program in particular.
V. When Victim #3 first got to USC, she noticed certain cliques existed with the other fellows. Victim #3 did not feel welcome and felt like an outsider. Respondent was personable and befriended her. Victim #3 felt comfortable with Respondent especially because they both spoke Spanish. Respondent would tell Victim #3 that people were talking about her behind her back and this further alienated Victim #3 from her peers.
W. Early in the program, Victim #3 started to trust in Respondent. Victim #3 thought of Respondent as the only person who was her ally during her fellowship. In or about September or October 2016, Victim #3 learned that she had passed her boards for internal medicine and Respondent suggested they have drinks to celebrate. Victim #3 invited him to her apartment one evening. Over drinks Respondent told Victim #3 that he found her attractive and wanted to be "friends with benefits." Victim #3 told him that she was not interested in being "friends with benefits." Out of the blue, Respondent unzipped her dress and started fondling her breasts and putting his hands on her underwear. Victim #3 was shocked and asked what he was doing. Victim #3 told him that she was not interested, pulled away and zipped her dress back up. Respondent again told Victim #3 that she was attractive and implied that he would not take no for an answer.
X. For Victim #3's birthday in October 2016, a group of people, including Respondent and Victim #3, went to an Octoberfest Party to celebrate. There were hundreds of people from all over the world at the party and Victim #3 was enjoying socializing. Respondent got upset that she was talking to other men, so he squeezed Victim #3's fingers and almost broke them.
Y. Later that month, many of the fellows including Respondent and Victim #3 attended a pharmaceutical dinner. There was a lot of alcohol being served and Victim #3 became intoxicated. Victim #3 could barely stand on her feet and some of the other fellows put her in the car with Respondent and told him to take Victim #3 home. Respondent took Victim #3 to his apartment, and from midnight until about 5:00 in the morning, Victim #3 was vomiting in Respondent's bathroom. Victim #3 went to lay down in Respondent's bed with her blazer and pants on. Respondent got on top of Victim #3, pulled her pants off without her consent, forced himself on her, and started penetrating her vagina with his penis. This was all against Victim #3's will. Victim #3 told Respondent to stop multiple times both in English and Spanish but he would not. Finally, Victim #3 told Respondent that she was going to vomit on him and he stopped. For the first time in her life Victim #3 felt violated; she relayed this to her younger sister.
Z. Later at the hospital, Victim #3 confronted Respondent about the sexual assault on her and Respondent replied "that doesn't count" in Spanish. Respondent also said "no one comes to my bed with their pants on." Victim #3 had never had a man do this to her. She was in shock and blocked it out of her head.
AA. In about April 2017, a group of people, including Respondent and Victim #3 were watching a soccer game at his apartment. At some point during the evening, Respondent and Victim #3 started kissing and he began forcing her to enter his bedroom. Victim #3 told him to stop and that she was not interested in having sex with him. Respondent grabbed her and pulled her to the bedroom. Victim #3 started crying and told him that she didn't want this. Respondent ignored her and forced himself on Victim #3 while she continued to cry and told him she was not interested in sex like this. Victim #3 pleaded with Respondent to stop but he did not.
BB. In mid-May 2017, Victim #3 was in Chicago for a medical conference. Respondent arrived at the conference one morning at around 9:00 a.m. as he had taken a red-eye flight. As Victim #3 was getting ready to leave for the conference, he asked if he could sleep at her place as his room was not ready. He came into the room, undressed himself and went to bed. While victim #3 was finishing her makeup, he made comments about her breasts. Victim #3 told Respondent in Spanish to stop but he did not. Respondent got a hold of Victim #3, put her hands over her head, pinned her to the bed, and raped her. Respondent kept pushing his penis inside of her angrily while staring into space. Victim #3 felt like a battered woman who keeps getting violated. She was stunned and humiliated.
CC. The next day, Victim #3 confronted Respondent and told him it was not okay what he was doing to her. Victim #3 asked him why he kept doing this to her and he said because "We like it." Victim #3 said "No, I don't like it." Later, at a conference dinner, as Victim #3 was sitting next to Respondent, she saw photos and texts of women on his phone and she said "are you going to have sex with them and treat them like trash later?" He said he would not have sex with them because he respected them and he wants to date them. Respondent got up and walked out of the dinner. The next day, Victim #3 confronted Respondent again and told him he had forced himself on her and she felt so violated.
DD. Victim #3 was so distraught that she could no longer attend the conference. Victim #3 called one of her best friends from medical school, Dr. R., who lives in Chicago. Victim #3 went to stay with her and told her about the sexual assaults and Dr. R. told Victim #3 that she needed to call the police. Dr. R. had never seen Victim #3 so distraught.
EE. Victim #3 managed to get to the airport in Chicago but felt so broken that she contacted an online counseling service. When she arrived in Los Angeles, she called the Chicago Police Department and they put her in contact with a detective who told her to call the LAPD. Victim, #3 contacted the LA Rape Hotline and told them what happened.
FF. Victim #3 then learned that Respondent had also sexually assaulted another cardiology fellow. Victim #3 was in disbelief to learn that USC had known about her complaints against Respondent and had allowed him to continue supervising other fellows and working at the Hospital.
GG. This whole experience has left Victim #3 betrayed and degraded. She has felt violated on so many different levels.
Allegations of Gross Negligence:
HH. Respondent engaged in multiple instances of sexual assault and intimidation.
II. Respondent's behavior of sexual assault, inappropriate touching, and unwanted physical contact constituted behavior that undermined a: culture of safety.
JJ. Respondent's disruptive behavior renders him unsafe to practice medicine and threatens the health and safety of patients.
SECOND CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Unprofessional Conduct)
7. Respondent Guillermo Andres Cortes, M.D. is subject to disciplinary action under section 2234 in that he sexually assaulted three of his colleagues. The circumstances are as follows:
A. Complainant incorporates by reference the allegations contained above in paragraph 6, A-JJ, as though fully set forth herein.
Excerpt from Order on Petition for Interim Suspension dated 5/30/2018:
FACTUAL FINDINGS
1. Petitioner filed the Petition while acting in her official capacity as the Executive Director of the Board.
2. On August 9, 2012, the Board issued Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number A 122415 to Respondent. Respondent's certificate is scheduled to expire on April 30, 2020.
3. In February 2018, following publication of a Los Angeles Times article about an alleged sexual assault by Respondent while working at Los Angeles County, University of Southern California Medical Center (County USC), the Board initiated an investigation into the alleged matter. The investigation uncovered additional victims at County USC. The facts regarding Respondent's conduct with the three victims are set forth in Factual Findings 4 through 8, below, and are established for purposes of this proceeding only.
4A. Victim #2 is a physician. She met Respondent in Fall 2014, when she was completing her internal medicine residency at County USC, through the USC Keck School of Medicine (USC Keck). They never dated, and she told Respondent that she wanted to be just friends.
4B. In January 2015, they made plans to get together to swim in Respondent's pool. Victim #2 planned to go to dinner with her friend, "G," later that evening, so she anticipated that she would be at Respondent's house for just a few hours.
4C. When she arrived at Respondent's apartment, he made them margaritas, then they went to the pool to swim. They returned to Respondent's apartment, and he made them additional margaritas. When they went back to the pool, Respondent tried to kiss Victim #2, but she pushed him away.
4D. They eventually returned to Respondent's apartment At that point, Victim #2 was very intoxicated. She "awoke" to discover him on top of her. (Exhibit 2, p. 2.) Her bikini top remained on, but her bikini bottom and shorts were off, and Respondent's penis was inside her vagina without her consent.
4E. When Respondent left to use the restroom, Victim #2 got dressed and ran out of the apartment. Respondent caught up with her in the hallway, and they got into the elevator. Once Respondent entered the elevator, Victim #2 exited the elevator and ran down the stairwell. She ran into the street and was walking towards an underpass where she saw "a lot of homeless people and ... did not want to go through it." (Exhibit 2, p. 2.) At that point, Respondent had again caught up with her, this time driving his automobile. Victim #2 thought it would be safer to get into Respondent's vehicle rather than walking under the underpass, and she allowed Respondent to drive her home. When they arrived at her apartment, Victim #2 yelled at Respondent that she "never wanted this," slammed the car door, and ran into her apartment. (Exhibit 2, p.2.) Victim #2 called her friend G and told him what had happened. Victim #2 reported the incident to the police.
4F. In the Opposition to the Petition, Respondent's counsel argues that Respondent "vehemently denies the allegations that anything that may have occurred was not consensual." (Opposition, p. 3, lines 20-21.) However, no declarations or affidavits were submitted to establish Respondent's denial or his purported assertion of consent.
5A. Victim #1 is currently a second-year fellow in a cardiology training program at USC Keck. In November 201S; Victim #1 was a third-year internal medicine resident at County USC, and Respondent was a second-year cardiology fellow there. Respondent would often act as her direct supervisor.
5B. On November 17, 201S, Victim #1 was working on the Nephrology Consult Service and needed to discuss a patient with Respondent. Victim #1 went to the Progressive Care Unit to talk to him. At that time, Respondent was watching a soccer game on his cell phone. When Victim #1 tried to talk to him, he told her to be quiet because he was watching the game. Respondent walked into the Cardiology Fellow Call Room, and Victim #1 followed to discuss the patient. After their discussion, when Victim #1 attempted to leave the room, Respondent blocked her exit and placed his hand on the door to prevent her from leaving. He then grabbed her arms, leaned into her, and forced his tongue into her mouth. Victim #1 tried unsuccessfully to get away while repeatedly telling Respondent to stop, but he ignored her.
5C. Respondent then untied Victim #1's scrub pants, forced his hand down into her underwear, and inserted his finger into her vagina without her consent. She asked him two times to remove his hand, but he refused to do so. He moved his finger back and forth while continuing to force his tongue into Victim #1 's mouth. She kept begging him to stop. Victim #1 did not scream because Respondent was physically much larger than she was, and she was afraid he would throw her down and "fully rape" her. Victim #1 feared for her safety, and she "wanted to get out of the room with the least amount of damage." (Exhibit 3, p. 2.) After several minutes. of struggling, Respondent unblocked her path, and Victim #1 ran out of the room.
5D. Victim #1 immediately texted her friend, "Dr. T," and asked if she could meet her to talk. When they met, Dr. T saw that Victim #1 was very distraught. Victim #1 began to cry, and she told Dr. T about the assault. Dr. T told Victim #1 to report the attack. However, Victim #1 was afraid that if she reported the attack, she would suffer retaliation. Victim #1 went home and called her best friend and her mother to tell them what happened.
5E. On about November 18, 201S, Victim #1 talked to Respondent by telephone and told him to never touch her again. She said that, when she told him to stop, he should have listened. On the same day, Respondent paged her. He claimed he felt bad, and he said, "Please don't tell anyone..., I have worked very hard to get here. Please don't tell anyone." Victim #1 did not respond. She continued to feel unsafe and had difficulty focusing on her work.
5F. In February 2016, Victim #1 met with Dr. Eric Hsieh who was then the Internal Medicine Residency Program Director at USC Keck, aμd she reported Respondent's sexual assault. She asked Dr. Hsieh not to schedule her to work with Respondent unless it was an emergency situation. However, there were two occasions when she was forced to work with Respondent.
5G. At some point in February 2016, Respondent was placed on leave.
5H. In December 201S, Victim #1 was matched with USC Keck Cardiology Fellowship. In February 2016, Victim #1 spoke with Dr. Shavelle, Director of the General Cardiovascular Fellowship Training Program at USC Keck, and she reported Respondent's sexual assault. However, Dr. Shavelle was disinclined to listen. During one of their telephone calls, he stated, "You knew what you were doing," and "now I have to tell all the fellows about it." (Exhibit 3, p. 3.)
5I. In the Opposition to the Petition, Respondent's counsel argues that Respondent "vehemently denies [Victim #1's] allegations." (Opposition, p. 3, lines 12-13.) However, no declarations or affidavits were submitted to establish Respondent's denial.
6A. Victim #3 is a second-year fellow in a cardiology training program at USC Keck. She first met Respondent in 2016, when she was a first-year fellow and Respondent was in his third year of fellowship. First year fellows are mentored and supervised by third-year fellows, and Respondent served in a supervisory role over her. Victim #3 also knew that Respondent is related to Dr. Clavijo, the Director of the Interventional Cardiology Fellowship Program at USC Keck.
6B. When Victim #3 began her fellowship, she felt like an outsider, and Respondent befriended her. She found Respondent to be personable, and she felt comfortable with him because they both spoke Spanish. Victim #3 trusted Respondent, and she viewed him as her only ally during the early part of her fellowship.
6C. In about September or October 2016, Victim #3 learned that she had passed her board examination for internal medicine, and Respondent suggested that they have drinks to celebrate. Victim #3 invited him to her apartment, and over drinks he told her that he found her attractive and wanted to be "friends with benefits." Victim #3 told him that she was not interested. Respondent then unzipped her dress and started fondling her breasts. Victim #3 pulled away and zipped up her dress.
6D. In October 2016, many of the fellows, including Respondent and Victim #3, attended a dinner sponsored by a pharmaceutical company. There was a lot of alcohol being served, and Victim #3 became intoxicated. Because she could barely stand up, some of the other fellows placed her in a car with Respondent and told him to take her home. However, Respondent took her to his apartment. From midnight until about 5:00 a.m., Victim #3 was vomiting in Respondent's bathroom.
She eventually went to lie down on Respondent's bed wearing her blazer and pants. Without her consent, Respondent climbed on top of her, pulled off her pants, and started penetrating her vagina with his penis. She told him to stop, but he did not. Finally Victim #3 told him that she was going to vomit on him, so he stopped. Later at work, when Victim #3 confronted Respondent about what happened, he stated, "no one comes to my bed with their pants on." (Exhibit 5, p. 3.)
6E. In the Opposition to the Petition, Respondent's counsel argues that Respondent "again vehemently denies the allegations that anything that may have occurred was not consensual." (Opposition, p. 4, lines 4-5.) However, no declarations or affidavits were submitted to establish Respondent's denial or his purported assertion of consent.
6F. After the October 2016 nonconsensual sexual encounter, the nature of the relationship between Respondent and Victim #3, as described in Victim #3's declaration, becomes unclear.
(1). In about April 2017, a group of people went to Respondent's apartment to watch a soccer game. Despite the prior nonconsensual sexual encounter, Victim #3 went to the apartment, and she and Respondent "started kissing later that night." (Exhibit 5, p. 3.) Victim #3 recalls that Respondent "began forcing me to enter his bedroom. I told him to stop and that I was not interested in having sex with him. He grabbed me and pulled me to the bedroom. . . . [H]e forced himself on me while I continued to cry and told him I was not interested in sex like this." (Ibid.)
(2). Later, in May 2017, Victim #3 went to Chicago for a medical conference. Respondent arrived in Chicago at 9:00 a.m. after taking a red-eye flight. He showed up at Victim #3's room and asked if he could sleep there because his room was not ready. Despite their prior negative encounters, Victim #3 agreed. Respondent came into the room and went to bed, while Victim #3 got ready to leave the room to attend the conference. However, Respondent began commenting about Victim #3's breasts and began chasing her around the room. According to Victim #3, "I again told him I did not want to have sex.... Again, I told him to stop. He didn't. He got a hold of me, put my hands over my head, pinned me to the bed, and raped me. He kept pushing his penis inside me angrily while staring into space." (Exhibit 5, p. 4.) When Victim #3 returned to Los Angeles, she called the Chicago Police Department, and they referred her to a Los Angeles Police Department detective. She was told her case was weak because she did not complete a rape kit or go to the emergency room.
(3). Victim #3 's admitted actions (i.e., going to Respondent's apartment and kissing him; allowing him into her hotel room) following the prior nonconsensual sexual encounter suggest that her declaration may not have included all of the facts surrounding the encounters in April and May 2017. While a continuing relationship does not foreclose the possibility of repeated sexual assaults, there are apparent incongruities in Victim #3's description of the events in April and May 2017 which require further exploration. Consequently, given the nebulousness in Victim #3's declaration regarding those encounters, the April and May 2017 sexual assaults were not established for purposes of this proceeding.
6G. As Exhibit A, Respondent's counsel submitted 97 pages of screen shots which counsel's declaration stated were "true and correct copies of text messages exchanged between [Victim #3 and Respondent] between October 2016 and June 2017." (Declaration of Tomas A. Guterres, p. 7, para. 7.) Respondent submitted no declaration, and Victim #3 did not authenticate the screen shots of the texts. As Exhibit B, Respondent's counsel submitted his "translations from Spanish to English of certain relevant portions of the text messages from Exhibit A." (Ibid.) Mr. Guterres' attempted authentication was insufficient to establish the authenticity of ExhiBit A. Moreover, a majority of the texts are in Spanish, and Mr. Guterres' translation does not comport with the certified interpretation requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. (See Gov. Code,§ 11435.55.) Furthermore, counsel translated only the portions he deemed "relevant" and not the entirety of Exhibit A. For the foregoing reasons, the contents of Exhibits A and B were given no weight.
7. In 2017, Respondent left County USC, and he is currently working at UCLA Medical Plaza in Los Angeles.
8A. Suzanne Arlene Fidler, M.D., F.A.C.P., is a licensed physician in California. She is board certified in internal medicine. Dr. Fidler was retained by the Board to review documents from the Board investigation regarding Respondent's interactions with Victims #1, #2, and #3, and to render an opinion regarding whether Respondent is safe to practice medicine.
8B. Dr. Fidler provided a declaration and an attached expert report of her findings, both dated May 22, 201S. In her report, she hated the standard for professional behavior:
Professional misconduct is behavior generally unacceptable to the medical community. It is unprofessional conduct to engage in unwanted sexual advances, unwelcome sexual contact, intimidating behavior, or sexual assault. Physicians are expected to adhere to acceptable professional standards and follow appropriate code of conduct at all times. They are never permitted to sexually assault anyone anywhere or at any time regardless of whether it is at work or after work. [¶] ... [¶ ]
As a physician, [Respondent] is expected to engage in appropriate and professional behavior at all times. He must professionally interact with all members of the healthcare team. Regardless of rank, all members of the healthcare team are expected to be treated with respect and to work in a safe environment.
(Exhibit 7, p. 8.)
8C. Dr. Fidler further noted that, when certain misconduct impacts other healthcare providers, this poses a risk to patient safety. She explained:
The effective delivery of care to patients requires a collaborative healthcare team. Disruptive behavior or behavior that undermines a culture of safety is prohibited. This conduct interferes with patient care and creates a hostile work environment in a healthcare organization. Examples 1of disruptive behavior include verbal abuse, sexual harassment, threatening words, behavior reasonably interpreted as intimidating, [and] unwelcome physical contact .... When a physician engages in disruptive behavior, it creates a stressful and negative work environment and interferes with other workers' effective functioning.
The Joint Commission requires healthcare institutions to address behavior that undermines a culture of safety. As early as 2008, the Joint Commission issued a Sentinel Event Alert stating, "Intimidating and disruptive behaviors can foster medical errors, contribute to poor patient satisfaction and to preventable adverse outcomes, increase the cost of care, and cause qualified clinicians, administrators and managers to seek new positions in more professional environments. Safety and quality of patient care is dependent on teamwork, communication, and a collaborative work environment."
(Exhibit 7, p. 14.)
8D. Dr. Fidler opined:
[Respondent] engaged in multiple instances against multiple female physicians of unwelcome physical conduct of sexual nature which included unwelcome touching, sexual assault, intimidation and interference with other people's ability to work. Each of these acts which occurred to each of these female physicians constitutes unprofessional conduct and is unacceptable based on medical community standards. [¶]
This pattern of unprofessional conduct constitutes an extreme departure from the standard of care. [¶] ... [¶]
(Exhibit 7, p. 13.)
8E. Dr. Fidler further opined that Respondent's failure to comply with established professional standards "posed a substantial risk to patient safety based on the negative impact of his conduct and disruptive behavior on the healthcare team." (Exhibit 7, pp. 14, 21.)
8F. Dr. Fidler concluded that Respondent is a danger to the public and that to allow him to continue practicing medicine is a threat to the health and safety of the consumers of the State of California.
8G. Dr. Fidler recommended immediate license suspension.
Excerpt from Article dated 3/13/2020:
The case was referred to authorities, but prosecutors declined to file a felony charge of penetration by force. A deputy district attorney said the case lacked enough evidence “at this time,” according to a memo obtained by The Times.
Cortes moved on to a job at UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine, but he was suspended with pay in May 2018 after an accusation was filed regarding the sexual assault claims with the state medical board. He remains on paid leave, according to the university. Cortes was fired from a job at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center for the same reason.
Cortes’ state medical license is listed as current and active. His attorney said Cortes is not working as a physician at this time.
|
