Respiratory therapist had an addiction to porn and started viewing it at work when he found out hospital didn't monitor Internet usage
This instalment of You Make the Call features a medical professional who was fired after viewing pornography on hospital computers.
The worker was a respiratory therapist at the Chinook Regional Hospital in Lethbridge, Alta. He assessed patients and provided treatment, including close physical contact with patients while alone in a hospital room. Through six years of service, he had no disciplinary issues and performed his duties well.
The therapist often had periods of downtime when there were no patients to see, particularly on overnight shifts. During these periods, he would often go to a computer room across the hall from the staff room, which contained a computer connected to the Internet.
In July 2007, the hospital conducted an audit of Internet users and found the therapist frequently used its Internet services for non-work-related purposes. The audit revealed the therapist looked at pornography on the hospital computer for two hours at the end of a recent shift, one-and-a-half hours nine days later and for one hour during another shift four days after that. There was no evidence his duties were neglected and he kept his habit from his co-workers.
The 43-year-old therapist was aware of the hospital’s Internet policies prohibiting the viewing of pornography at work, so the hospital took this misconduct seriously. It turned out he was addicted to pornography and was trying beat the addiction by installing monitoring software at home that notified his wife if he viewed pornography, as well as taking counselling. However, when the therapist learned computer use at the hospital wasn’t monitored, he began viewing pornography there.
On Aug. 7, 2007, the therapist was suspended with pay pending a final decision on his status. He was remorseful and apologized for his misconduct, admitting what he did and explaining his addiction. However, the hospital decided to terminate his employment as he had knowingly violated a policy and the nature of his job required a high level of trust. The hospital was also concerned patients would be uneasy if it was discovered the therapist looked at pornography while at work, particularly since there was a past incident in the region where a male nurse sexually assaulted a patient after viewing pornography.
You Make the Call
Did the hospital have just cause for dismissal?
OR
Was dismissal too harsh in the circumstances?
If you said the hospital had just cause for dismissal, you’re right. The arbitration board found the therapist’s circumstances were mitigating enough to at least consider he could continue to do his job. Since the therapist had no history of dealing inappropriately with female patients nor any psychological evaluations that indicated a likelihood to do so, the board felt there was no reason to assume there was a causal connection between his pornography addiction and a risk to female patients.
The board also gave weight to the therapist’s willingness to discuss his addiction, his apology and the efforts he made to fight the addiction. These all increased the likelihood he could mend the employment relationship and perform his duties, said the board.
Also in the therapist’s favour was six years of service with no disciplinary record. However, the board’s main concern was with regards to female patients. It noted the hospital must ensure female patients have complete confidence in trusted professionals performing the examinations. It was reasonable to believe female patients who knew the therapist had viewed pornographic websites at the hospital might have “a heightened level of discomfort” at the prospect of intimate examinations requiring them to partly disrobe and involved the therapist touching them. Because of this primary concern, the board found the therapist “can no longer be considered as a trusted respiratory therapist in this particular hospital environment.”
