A DOCTOR has been found guilty of professional misconduct in aspects of his treatment of a man who died from cancer more than a year after the doctor removed a mole from his back without sending it for diagnosis.
A fitness-to-practise committee of the Medical Council yesterday found Dr Peter Peng-Cheng Ting guilty of six of eight counts of professional misconduct in his treatment of William Cashell (37), a father of one, of Rush, Co Dublin.
The committee will now make recommendations to the council concerning any sanctions to be applied to Dr Ting (51), who has a general practice in Artane, Dublin.
Mr Cashell’s father Michael said the family was very happy with the outcome of the two-day inquiry and hoped the case would “raise awareness for other people”.
The inquiry heard Mr Cashell went to Dr Ting in February 2007 with a mole on his back.
Lorraine Coady, partner of Mr Cashell, said he had complained that the mole was sore and itchy. She had noticed the mole about December 2006 and it had increased in size and changed colour by February 2007.
Dr Ting cauterised the mole, which he described as a skin lesion and said he believed it was “not sinister”. He admitted he had not recorded the consultation or procedure in medical notes.
After Mr Cashell returned to Dr Ting in April 2007 with a lump under his arm, Dr Ting referred him in May to a specialist at Dublin’s Beaumont Hospital, describing the matter as “urgent”. He also arranged for a chest X-ray and ultrasound scan.
The underarm lump doubled in size by July 2007 when Mr Cashell developed a lump in his groin.
Beaumont had given him an appointment for August 17th, 2007, with a consultant but Dr Ting sought an earlier appointment, saying Mr Cashell was experiencing considerable pain.
Mr Cashell was seen at Beaumont’s AE where blood tests were carried out. These were not considered to reveal any abnormalities and he was returned into Dr Ting’s care.
On September 3rd, Mr Cashell reported to D-Doc out of hours service with pain and it sent him to Beaumont, which admitted him. A biopsy on September 6th revealed he had terminal cancer and he died on May 31st, 2008.
The committee found Dr Ting guilty of professional misconduct on six counts but found two other counts were not proven. It found professional misconduct in his not sending the mole tissue for biopsy and said he had failed to adequately manage “a potentially very serious condition”.
Dr Ting’s admitted failure to maintain a note of his February 2007 consultation with Mr Cashell also amounted to professional misconduct. A finding he had failed to act in the best interests of Mr Cashell amounted to professional misconduct and was “unacceptable”, the committee added.
Dr Ting also failed to take an adequate history from Mr Cashell and failed to apply appropriate standards and judgment, again amounting to professional misconduct, the committee found.
Two allegations of misconduct – that after February 2007, Dr Ting failed to refer Mr Cashell to a suitably qualified specialist and failed to carry out adequate investigations – were not proven.
It found Dr Ting failed to respond to notices from the council concerning his treatment of Mr Cashell.
