Three-member panels of the Discipline Committee conduct public hearings into cases of alleged incompetence or professional misconduct. The panels are a mix of elected and appointed Council members.
If found guilty of professional misconduct or incompetence, a member’s certificates may be revoked, suspended or limited. In cases of professional misconduct only, the committee may also reprimand, admonish or counsel the member, impose a fine, publish its order in Professionally Speaking, or order the member to pay costs.
Panels of the Discipline Committee have ordered summaries of these recent disciplinary cases to be published in Professionally Speaking. Copies of full decisions are available through library@oct.ca.
Hearings
Member: Not identified
Decision: Revoked
A Discipline Committee panel directed the Registrar to revoke the teaching certificate of a member for sexually assaulting a female student.
The member did not attend the February 5, 2007 hearing nor did he have legal representation.
The panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct after considering the evidence, the onus and standard of proof and the submissions of College lawyers.
Criminal courts gave the member a conditional sentence of 22 months followed by a year’s probation for the sexual assault of a young female sometime between May 1983 and July 1986. He was also ordered to perform 200 hours of community srvice and to avoid being alone with any female under 14 unless accompanied by another adult. A court-ordered publication ban prevents naming the member.
The panel also heard evidence that the member pleaded guilty to a separate charge of common assault against a female on June 30, 2005 for which he received a suspended sentence of 15 months and was ordered to perform 30 hours of community service.
“The member gave no consideration to the well-being of the victims,” the panel wrote in its decision, which appears on the College’s public register.
While the member’s name cannot be published, the public can feel secure knowing that his Certificate of Qualification and Registration has been revoked.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Suspension, reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered the Registrar to suspend the teaching certificate of a member for three months for failing to chaperone students properly during a basketball trip.
The College held a public hearing on September 21, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the high school teacher from the Ontario North East DSB. The member, who was certified to teach in June 1990, attended via teleconference and had legal representation.
While acting as a chaperone for a boys’ basketball team trip in February 2006, the member drank alcohol in their presence, permitted students to drive the team’s van and failed to notice that two boys exceeded the team’s 11 PM curfew by returning to the hotel at 2 AM.
In addition, the member did not notice a 19-year-old member of the team buying and drinking alcohol while the team dined at a restaurant, and he did not investigate a fight between two team members that left one injured. The teacher failed to seek medical treatment for the injured student and later, during a school investigation into the matter, tried to hide that he knew of or participated in the events.
The panel also heard that the member alerted a vice-principal about poor conditions leading to a road closure on one day but failed to let school administrators know he would be absent until the next day.
Based on these events, the board suspended him for five days without pay. He now lives in British Columbia and is not teaching.
Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel ordered the member to appear for a reprimand. Further, it ordered the Registrar to suspend the member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration for three months.
In addition, the member must provide a written psychiatric assessment 60 days before returning to work, proving he is fit to teach, and he must tell the Registrar the name of his employer at least 30 days before teaching. The panel also ordered the member to show proof of completing, at his own expense, a 12-step recovery program, such as Alcoholics Anonymous, and a course on appropriate boundaries.
In a minority opinion, one panel member disagreed with the decision not to name the member.
The minority decision states, “The public should be made aware of the name of a member of the teaching profession who has been found guilty of professional misconduct for consuming alcohol while engaged in his duties, thus compromising the safety and well-being of students in his care. There is no guarantee that the member will not repeat this type of behaviour and it is important therefore to include his name to act as a specific deterrent.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Kelly James Madden
Registration number: 457292
Decision: Revoked
A Discipline Committee panel ordered the Registrar to revoke the teaching certificate of Kelly James Madden for repeated inappropriate behaviour towards female students.
The College held a public hearing on September 21, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the physical education teacher, who was certified to teach in September 2002. Madden’s lawyer attended the hearing on his behalf.
The panel heard that an Oakville independent school fired Madden in October 2003 for allegedly touching the buttocks of a female student during a badminton warm-up exercise in a physical education class.
In February 2007 the Niagara DSB suspended Madden for 10 days without pay and reassigned him to another school after a series of incidents in which he paid special attention to an 18-year-old female student. This included visiting her home twice, taking her to stay at his residence once when no one else was there, talking with her frequently by phone, giving her one of his T-shirts and a $20 movie gift certificate and driving her home after a school sports event.
After being reassigned, Madden engaged in inappropriate behaviour with another 18-year-old student. He commented on her appearance and clothing, kissed her neck in his office and her lips in a gym equipment room, asked how she felt about a student-teacher relationship, and asked if she was attracted to and wanted him. As a result, the board suspended Madden with pay in October 2007 and fired him in April 2008.
Having considered the evidence and based on a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Madden guilty of professional misconduct and ordered the Registrar to revoke his Certificate of Qualification and Registration.
The panel said that Madden “was in a position of trust and authority and repeatedly abused that trust. He did not heed repeated warnings regarding his behaviour and suspensions had no impact.
“The member showed disregard for his position as a role model and brought the reputation of the profession into disrepute,” the panel said. “Revocation is the only appropriate penalty in these circumstances.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Counselling and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered a member to appear before it for counselling and to complete a course in appropriate boundaries following a series of inappropriate physical and sexually suggestive verbal interactions with female students.
The College held a public hearing on October 15, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the Simcoe County DSB high school teacher. Certified to teach in June 1990, the member attended the hearing with his lawyer.
In a series of incidents over the 2005–06 and 2007–08 school years, the member engaged in verbal and physical interactions with several female students that were inappropriate and unprofessional in that they were capable of a sexually suggestive interpretation.
For example, after colliding with a student in the hallway, the member said, “You’re probably used to men throwing themselves at you.” On another occasion he told a different student, “You look good” or “You are good looking.” The teacher also poked a student in the abdomen to lighten her mood and said to another student, “I don’t know what is wrong between us right now or what I can do to fix it. If you were a puppy you would roll over and I could tickle your tummy.”
Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel ordered the member to appear before it for counselling. The member was also required to complete a course in appropriate boundaries and boundary violation issues at his own expense within three months.
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Admonishment
A Discipline Committee panel held a public hearing on May 20, 2009 into a complaint against a member for supplying her own prescription medication to a kindergarten student without the parents’ consent.
Neither the member, who was certified to teach in December 1997, nor her legal counsel attended the hearing.
The panel heard evidence that in March 2007 and again in May, the teacher provided her own medication to a five-year-old student whose parents had neglected to provide the school with the required two-week supply of Ritalin. The member did not co-operate with the Children’s Aid Society and her actions were reported to the police. However, no charges were laid because there was no evidence of intent to administer an illegal substance.
Having considered the evidence, a memorandum of agreement, a plea of guilty and the submissions of the College’s dispute resolution officer, the panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered that she appear before a member of the committee to be admonished.
“The member’s behaviour caused a student to be put at risk,” the panel wrote in its decision. “The member displayed poor judgment, given her 10 years of experience and, as such, the committee deems that admonishment is necessary in order to communicate to the member the seriousness of her actions. Supplying medication in any circumstances without authorization and confirmation from parents cannot be tolerated by the profession.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered a member to appear for a reprimand for failing to prevent students from duct taping a 16-year-old boy as a belated birthday stunt.
The College held a public hearing on October 20, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the Simcoe Muskoka Catholic DSB occasional teacher. The member, who was certified to teach in June 1975, attended with his lawyer.
During a Grade 11 English class in September 2007, three boys duct taped the mouth, arms and legs of another student, who had recently celebrated his birthday. The teacher told them not to use the tape on the boy’s mouth or to use a marker and said, “Hey, we’re going overboard” and “This is not the time or the place” or words to that effect. The episode lasted less than four minutes. Aside from the pain he experienced when the tape was removed from his skin, the student was not injured. Another student recorded the incident on a cellphone and posted the video to YouTube, where it has been viewed more than 1,000 times.
In December of that year, the board fired the teacher.
Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered him to appear for a reprimand.
The member was also ordered to complete a course in classroom management at his own expense within three months.
“The member, in allowing three male students in a class he was supervising to duct tape another student to a chair, duct taping parts of his body, including his mouth, failed to maintain the standards of the profession. The member failed to prevent or stop the other students from removing the duct tape from the student’s skin, despite yelling and swearing by the student due to the pain of removing the duct tape,” the panel wrote in its decision. “By his inaction, in all respects of this incident, the member demonstrated unprofessional conduct.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered a member to appear for a reprimand for disciplining students inappropriately and for failing to report to the Children’s Aid Society that one of her students said that he was being beaten at home.
The College held a public hearing on November 5, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the Toronto DSB elementary school teacher. The member, who was certified to teach in July 1990, attended the hearing with her lawyer.
At least four times between 2005 and 2007, the teacher disciplined students by: pulling them by the ear; hitting one on the head with a pointer; grabbing and restraining a student by the wrist; and grabbing another by the wrist, arm or hand when her instructions were not followed.
She also left two students unsupervised in a hallway alcove in April 2006 while she accompanied other students to an upstairs classroom.
Despite the complaints, the teacher has received ongoing occasional teaching assignments from the board since May 2008 without incident.
Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered her to appear for a reprimand.
As well, the panel ordered the member to complete a course on positive discipline techniques and classroom management skills within 90 days following the hearing at her own expense. She was told to complete an Additional Basic Qualification course prior to taking any full-time elementary-level position. Further, she was directed to review reporting requirements to relevant child protection agencies or governing bodies regarding suspicions of student neglect or abuse with a representative of the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario.
The member was also ordered to report to the Registrar within 30 days of completing each of the three conditions on her certificate.
“The member abused students under her care on at least four occasions over two academic years,” the panel wrote in its decision. “These actions, along with being abusive, are unprofessional and fail to meet the standards of the profession.”
The classroom management course will help to remediate the member while the ABQ course will enable her to engage students more effectively, the panel said. Publication provides a general deterrent to the profession and alerts the public that members are educated on the importance of immediately reporting any suspected abuse of children to relevant child protection agencies or governing bodies.
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand
A Discipline Committee panel ordered a member to appear for a reprimand for swearing at and verbally abusing a student in front of other students and staff.
The College held a public hearing on November 5, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic DSB secondary school English teacher. The member, who was certified to teach in June 1991, attended the hearing with his lawyer.
In May 2008 the teacher, while in the presence of other students and staff, yelled and swore at a male student in a school hallway.
Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered him to appear for a reprimand.
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered a member to appear for a reprimand for pretending to tape a young student to a chair and verbally abusing him.
The College held a public hearing on November 2, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the teacher, who worked for the Conseil des écoles catholiques du Centre-Est. Certified to teach in June 2004, the member did not attend the hearing, but was represented by her lawyer.
During September and October of 2006, the teacher told a young male student to put his hands on his thighs and, as a joke, pretended to tape him to the chair by attaching and rolling masking tape from one side of the seat to the other, above his legs and hands. She also humiliated him in class by calling him “pig-headed.”
Having considered the evidence, a plea of guilt, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct and ordered her to appear before the panel within 12 months to receive a reprimand.
The panel also ordered the teacher to complete a professional boundaries course at her own expense.
“Pretending to fasten a seven-year-old child to a chair and using humiliating language toward a young child constitute a failure to maintain the standards of the profession, and these actions can reasonably be regarded as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional,” the panel wrote in its decision. “Members of the College must ensure that the children in their care feel valued and respected at all times. In this case, the member failed in her duty to create an environment that fosters the development of the child.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Kristen Ann Ross, OCT
Registration number: 418691
Decision: Reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel reprimanded Durham DSB teacher Kristen Ann Ross for failing to report a student’s allegations of sexual abuse to her parents or the authorities.
Ross, who was certified to teach in August 1998, attended the College-held public hearing on November 9, 2009 with her lawyer.
The panel heard evidence that the Durham DSB teacher and a colleague took two students they had coached on a shopping trip and overnight hotel stay in another city. Afterwards, one of the students, then under 16, told Ross that she had been touched sexually by her colleague’s husband while at the hotel. The student raised the matter again with Ross in a conversation a little more than a week later. However, Ross failed to inform the student’s parents, any school or board officials, the police or the Children’s Aid Society of the student’s sexual touching allegation.
Although Ross was charged with failing to report, contrary to the Child and Family Services Act, the Provincial Offences Court dismissed the charge and the Ontario Court of Justice upheld the decision on appeal.
Having considered the evidence and based on a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Ross guilty of professional misconduct and ordered Ross to appear before it to be reprimanded.
She was also ordered to complete a course in professional ethics at her own expense within 60 days of the date of the order.
“The member had a duty to report allegations of child abuse and this did not occur,” the panel wrote in its decision. “On two separate occasions, over a period of approximately 10 days, the student disclosed to the member that she had been sexually touched by the colleague’s husband. By failing to report the disclosure, the member did not follow the written policy of the Durham DSB to report a case of suspected child abuse.
“Teachers are expected to protect students in their care at all times. By not reporting allegations of sexual abuse, the member failed to maintain the standards of the profession and failed to comply with the Education Act. Her conduct was unprofessional and unbecoming a member.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Leslie Ann Welsh
Registration number: 214106
Decision: Suspension, reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered the Registrar to suspend the certificate of Leslie Ann Welsh and ordered her to face a reprimand for fostering an inappropriate relationship with a student and failing to report that student’s allegations of sexual abuse against Welsh’s husband.
Welsh, who was certified to teach in April 1996, attended the College-held public hearing on November 9, 2009 with her lawyer.
The panel heard evidence that over two academic years spanning 2003–05, the Durham DSB teacher sent inappropriate personal e-mails, cards and letters to a student, referring to her as “my butterfly” or “my angel.” Welsh told the student she was her special or best friend and in e-mails told the girl they were kindred spirits.
In the summer of 2005, Welsh and a colleague took two students they had coached on a shopping trip to another city, which included an overnight stay in a hotel. Although Welsh had received parental permission for the student to go, the teacher did not tell the parents that her husband would be staying with them overnight. One of the students, under 16 at the time, later told Welsh and her colleague that Mr. Welsh had touched her sexually while at the hotel. Welsh did not believe the student’s allegation and, therefore, did not report it to the board, the Children’s Aid Society or the girl’s parents.
However, Welsh sent further e-mails and a handwritten card to the student. The card included comments such as, “Not laughing,” “Feel your pain,” “Let’s carry on as we always have … no changes,” “No more tears … life is too short,” and “Deep breath … Smile … Hug …”
Criminal charges against Welsh for failing to report, contrary to the Child and Family Services Act, were dropped by the Provincial Offences Court, and that decision was upheld on appeal by the Ontario Court of Justice.
Having considered the evidence and based on a plea of no contest, a statement of uncontested facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Welsh guilty of professional misconduct.
The panel ordered the Registrar to suspend Welsh’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration for three months and ordered Welsh to appear for a reprimand.
Further, the panel directed Welsh to complete a course in professional ethics within 60 days of the date of the order at her own expense. The panel agreed that, if she complied with that condition, the third month of Welsh’s suspension should not be imposed.
In its written decision the panel noted that Welsh knew that her written communications with the student could be viewed as inappropriate. “I would instantly lose my job and my teaching credentials,” Welsh once told the student. “However, the communications continued,” the panel said.
“Parents place their trust in the profession and expect that students will be treated with respect,” the Discipline Committee panel wrote. “The member abused her power, violated the trust placed in her and brought the profession into disrepute. The member, over a lengthy period, transgressed the acceptable student/teacher boundaries. The committee views this as an egregious violation of a teacher’s duty towards students, parents and the profession.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Suspension, reprimand and conditions
A Discipline Committee panel reprimanded a member and ordered the Registrar to suspend her certificate for a year for mishandling student travel funds.
The College held a public hearing on November 25, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against a female teacher first certified to teach in June 1978. Her lawyer represented her at the hearing.
The teacher was responsible for organizing school trips to Europe and overseeing any associated fundraising activities. But, over the course of three academic years spanning 2002–05, she put student monies into her own bank account and sold a complimentary trip donated by a tour company for the benefit of all to one student for her personal gain.
The panel heard evidence that the member failed to deposit the student funds into a separate school bank account, failed to keep accurate records of the amounts received from students and used the money blended into her account to pay for personal expenses.
When accounting discrepancies were noted, the member reconciled the differences using money from her own account. She said that her failure to keep full and accurate accounting records occurred during a period of illness.
Having considered the evidence, a plea of no contest, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel found the member guilty of professional misconduct. The panel ordered the Registrar to suspend her Certificate of Qualification and Registration for one year from the date of the order. She was also reprimanded and was ordered to refrain from handling any money related to school activities or have any direct involvement in school financial affairs upon her return to teaching.
“By her actions, the member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, failed to keep records as required by her professional duties and committed acts deemed to be dishonourable and unprofessional and unbecoming a member,” the panel wrote in its decision.
The fact that the member was on long-term disability and had made full restitution were mitigating circumstances that allowed for a less serious penalty, the panel said.
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Not identified
Decision: Conditions
A Discipline Committee panel ordered a member to complete a course in appropriate discipline techniques after he was found guilty of professional misconduct for confronting a student and bringing him to tears.
The College held public hearings on February 11, 2008 and September 28, 2009 into allegations against the occasional teacher from the Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic DSB. The member was certified to teach in June 1971. He did not attend the final hearing but had legal representation.
In October 2005 the member, while leaving school in his car, confronted a Grade 8 boy who told him to slow down and called him “crazy” and “queer” or “fag.” The member took the boy into the principal’s office, yelled at him and demanded a written apology when he was unsatisfied with the sincerity of the boy’s verbal apologies. As a result the boy was trembling and in tears at one point.
Following an investigation, the board fired the member and removed him from its occasional teacher list. The member filed a grievance against the board, which resulted in a settlement between the parties. The board did not return the member to its occasional teacher list.
Having considered the evidence, a plea of guilty, an agreed statement of facts, a joint submission on penalty and the submissions of counsel, the panel ordered the member to complete a course in appropriate student discipline techniques at his own expense within 90 days.
In its written decision, the panel said that the member’s yelling “showed a lack of control over his professional demeanor.
“These actions occurred in the principal’s office without administration being present and able to assist in mediating a resolution,” the panel said. “In situations similar to this, where normal student discipline techniques fail to produce results and there is a risk of the member losing control, the member must ensure that professional decorum is maintained and that the support of administration is sought.”
Publication acts as an educational tool and informs the members of the profession that they must maintain control and seek administrative support when necessary in dealing with difficult behavioural situations. Publication of the findings also reassures the public that the College takes the issue of professional decorum seriously.
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
Member: Joanne Saundercook-Menard
Registration Number: 171806
Decision: Revoked
A Discipline Committee panel ordered the Registrar to revoke the teaching certificate of Joanne Saundercook-Menard for accepting a secret commission of $30,000 from a school board vendor to steer work its way.
The College held a public hearing on October 19, 2009 into professional misconduct allegations against the Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB teacher, who was certified to teach in June 1983. Saundercook-Menard attended the hearing with her lawyers. The panel learned that Saundercook-Menard had been found guilty by Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice in January 2007 of accepting $30,000 from Cash, Lehman and Associates to “facilitate the opportunity to provide services for the Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB.” The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction in June 2008 but set aside the original sentence of three months in jail and replaced it with a conditional sentence of 18 months. She was also ordered to make restitution of the $30,000.
From July to November 1999, Saundercook-Menard was a classroom teacher seconded to the board office to work on a number of projects funded by Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC). She was responsible for meeting people, engaging politicians and developing support for the projects.
HRDC granted funding to the board to run a project called Way to Go developed by Saundercook-Menard and her supervisor. The supervisor then asked Larry Cash, the principal of Cash, Lehman and Associates, to pay him and Saundercook-Menard $30,000 each. Cash agreed.
Saundercook-Menard submitted invoices from her own firm, MSJ ed.net and was paid by cheque. She never revealed the payments to other senior officials of the board.
Having considered the evidence, a guilty plea and the submissions of counsel, the panel found Saundercook-Menard guilty of professional misconduct and ordered the Registrar to revoke her Certificate of Qualification and Registration.
The panel accepted the trial judge’s finding that Saundercook-Menard knowingly acted outside the bounds of approval and that she set up a company to accept secret payments and to avoid detection. While she did not instigate the scheme, she was a willing and active participant, the panel said.
“Accepting a secret commission is deceitful and unethical,” the panel wrote in its decision.
The panel also found that Saundercook-Menard’s firing from the board and the resulting loss of her retirement benefits, reputation and standing in the education community were “natural consequences” of her chosen actions.
“This member has forfeited her privilege of membership in the profession,” the panel said. “The only appropriate penalty to restore public confidence in the teaching profession is revocation of the member’s certificate. Any lesser penalty for such a serious breach of trust would seriously undermine public confidence.”
The panel’s decision appears on the College’s public register.
