We use cookies to better understand how you use our site and to improve your experience by personalizing content. Please review our updated Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. If you accept the use of cookies, please click the "I accept" button.I acceptI declineX
Skip navigational links

Ohio Appeals Court Holds Permanent Revocation Proper Sanction For Sexual Abuse Of Psychiatric Patient


HLD, v. 33, n. 10 (October 2005)

Ohio Appeals Court Holds Permanent Revocation Proper Sanction For Sexual Abuse Of Psychiatric Patient

An Ohio appeals court found that permanent revocation of a psychiatrist's license was a proper sanction following allegations of sexual abuse of a patient. The appeals court also found that the hearing afforded the doctor was fair and in accordance with due process.

John Michael Schechter, M.D., a practicing psychiatrist, was notified by the Ohio State Medical Board (Board) that it intended to revoke his medical license based on allegations of improper sexual conduct with a patient. Schechter requested a hearing, at which Schechter "acknowledged that he had victimized [the patient], and that his treatment of [her] violated the standard that a psychiatrist owes to his patients." Expert witnesses testified that a patient with a history of sexual abuse, like the patient abused by Schechter, would be more vulnerable and that sexual conduct is never within the standard of care. The Board voted to permanently revoke Schechter's medical license. Schechter appealed.

            The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that the administrative hearing that led to Schechter's license revocation comported with the requirements of fairness and due process.

In dismissing Schechter's argument that the Board's findings were based on mischaracterizations of the evidence and were therefore unreliable, the appeals court found "reliable, probative, and substantial evidence in the record that substantiates all of the charges against appellant and supports the penalty imposed by the board," even though some minor mischaracterizations of certain evidence did occur.

The appeals court next found that the penalty imposed on Schechter was not "grossly excessive" or disproportionate to the prohibited acts committed by the doctor. Finding the evidence against Schechter "overwhelming," the appeals court accordingly held the permanent revocation of Schechter's license was not contrary to law.

Schechter v. Ohio State Med. Bd., No. 04AP-1115 (Ohio Ct. App. Aug. 9, 2005). To read the case, go to



© 2018 American Health Lawyers Association. All rights reserved. 1620 Eye Street NW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20006-4010 P. 202-833-1100 F. 202-833-1105