Lifetime ban for S'pore doctor who drugged, molested, & took photos of patient

He is serving 4.5 years in prison.

Andrew Koay | June 20, 2019, 05:44 PM

A doctor who was convicted and jailed for drugging, molesting, and taking photos of his patient, will no longer be able to practice even after he is released from prison.

According to The Straits Times, aesthetic doctor Tan Kok Leong was struck off the medical register by the Singapore Medical Council (SMC).

The decision comes after he admitted to his conviction before a disciplinary tribunal.

However, Tan stopped short of pleading guilty as "he wished to maintain his position that he was innocent of the charges".

Tan is currently in the midst of serving a 54-month (4.5-year) sentence.

First incident

CNA reported that Tan first molested the patient from Malaysia -- a fellow male doctor -- on June 6, 2013.

The patient had been undergoing a liposuction procedure when two clinical assistants witnessed Tan reaching under the surgical drape and touching the patient's genitals.

The court was told that one of the clinical assistants left the room in disgust and anger because she "didn't want to see more".

The victim's fiancee -- who is also a doctor -- was in the room at the time.

However, she did not see Tan's actions as she giving a nose filler injection to the patient.

Second incident

A month later, on July 5, 2013, Tan again molested the patient after the doctor had performed another liposuction procedure.

This time, Tan visited the patient at 11pm at the Oasia Hotel, where the patient was recuperating having undergone the procedure earlier that day.

He injected the patient with a "stupefying drug" and a painkiller.

Once asleep, Tan undressed the victim and touched his genitals, while taking photos of himself throughout the incident.

Tan then stayed in the hotel overnight and repeated his actions the next evening.

In total, 21 photos of the patient were found saved on Tan's mobile.

The photos were labelled with the patient's name with some of them showing his face and genitals.

Getting caught and sentenced

ST reported that Tan's crimes were exposed when Gerald Tan, who was Tan's partner at his clinic -- Life Source Medical Centre -- discovered the photos and reported them to the patient.

The victim subsequently lodged a police report.

After initially being sentenced to 42-months in jail, Tan had his jail term increased to 54-months after an appeal by prosecutors.

Tan's case was unprecedented

In their grounds of decision released on June 18, SMC described Tan's case as unprecedented given the serious nature of the charges, the brazen attitude with which they were committed, and the number of charges which Tan was convicted of.

The SMC also wrote about the "axiomatic" trust that patients must put in doctors to treat their bodies with integrity.

"Any breach of this trust brings irreparable harm to the reputation and good standing of the medical profession as a whole," they wrote.

"It follows that any medical practitioner convicted of a sexual offence in relation to a patient should, by that very act, be considered to be unfit to practise in this hallowed profession."

Asking for a two-year suspension during mitigation, Tan's lawyer made reference to the doctor's charity work with the Yellow Ribbon project where he had removed tattoos for ex-convicts.

His lawyer also posited that "the circumstances of the offence were highly exceptional, and had to be weighed against his achievements in the course of a distinguished career".

Degree of depravity

However, while the SMC acknowledged removing a doctor's name from the register is the severest punishment, they concluded that its decision to do so was justified.

They cited the "degree of depravity involved" in the offences, in which  Tan "essentially detained the patient without his permission for two days, and manhandled him at his whim and fancy in the most degrading manner":

"We were of the firm mind that the degree of culpability in the commission of the sexual offences was so great that there should be no doubt that the respondent should be stripped of his licence to practice on the basis of this ground alone."

Top image from Healthcare Singapore Website and Singapore Medical Council