Winnipeg Jewish Review  
Site Search:
Home  |  Archives  |  Contact Us
 
Features Local Israel Next Generation Arts/Op-Eds Editorial/Letters Links Obituary/In Memoriam
The College of Physicians issues statement re: engaging on public platforms following the Newman/ Bzura episodes-Did PARIM arguably try to interfere with an ongoing investigation of the College by pushing Bzura out?

by Rhonda Spivak, July 24,2024

 

On July 12, the College of Physicians and Surgeons issued a statement (full text below) that should give Dr. Gem Newman and anyone who may wish to follow in his footsteps cause for concern. In essence, it says that doctors should refrain from expressing opinions on issues that may cause anyone including "communities" to "feel isolated, harmed, or unsafe."

The use of the word "communities" is significant. It would apply to Newman who used his platform at convocation to go on an-anti-Israel rant, and then posted his speech on social media.

 

Studies show that most Jews identify with Israel as a positive tenant part of their Jewish identity, and thus many members of the Jewish community, including those in Newman's graduating class  arguably felt "isolated, harmed and unsafe" by the content of his words, and this arguably erodes trust in the profession. In his speech, Newman failed to show compassion for any suffering or trauma of victims and survivors on the Israeli equation in the current war in Gaza. On Oct 12, Dr. Newman arguably showed animus towards Jews/Zionists  when he retweeted a post 5 days after the worst attack on Jews since the Holocaust that said “I hate atrocities but I love atrocities in response to these atrocities.” Further, Dr. Newman also liked a post that trivialized Hamas rapes of Israeli Jews in its attacks on Oct 7. The post stated, “Israel clumsily weaponized rape claims, choosing to launch in the lead up to Int. Day for Elimination of Violence Against Women. Its campaign was cringe worthy, led by fascist war mongers, heavy handed, a disservice to victims of rape everywhere." Newman further doubled down on his words by suggesting in a post on X on May 22  that "Every platform is an appropriate platform" to insert his views and "call for an end to genocide." It is no wonder why many in the Jewish community would not want to be treated by Newman.


 

I read the statement below as a warning shot to Newman and anyone else who may wish to engage in similar behaviour to that this type of behaviour could land them in hot water with the College of Physicians and Surgeons [CPSM]. Note the College's statement specifically says, "Due to diverging opinions on various medical, political, social, and economical issues, anything posted in the public domain may be contested and result in a complaint to the College. CPSM is obligated to treat each complaint matter seriously and fairly and in accordance with current regulations and complaints processes."  With this statement any doctor making posts about hotly contested political issues will not be able to claim that they did not know that this could land them in a serious  complaints process with the College

 

 

This brings me to discuss the troubling situation of Dr. Matthew Bzura, who was incoming president of PARIM (Professional Association of Residents and Interns of Manitoban, a Canadian of  Polish descent who made a formal complaint against Newman with the College of Physicians and Surgeons for his convocation speech and some other of his posts on social media. The current president of PARIM Dr. Matthew Theissen (who is now Past President) complained that when Bzura made wrote a letter indicating he was filing a formal complaint he referred to himself as incoming President of PARIM and ought not to have done that. However, Bzura never said at any time that he was speaking on behalf of PARIM when he made his complaint. Had there been goodwill, Bzura could have come to some agreement with PARIM about how he would handle himself going forward. Further Bzura's lawyer Paul Edwards was prevented from being allowed to be in the PARIM meeting when Bzura was removed as secretary (his role prior to become president elect). This certainly raises some red flags for me.

 

Further, and perhaps, most importantly, we must ask whether PARIM in any way pushed out Bzura as part of an attempt to intervene in a formal complaint process before the College of Physicians and Surgeons against Newman?

Did PARIM attempt to punish Bzura for his action in taking a complaint against Newman?  One would hope that the medical profession would not countenance a sitiuation where a person is punished professionally for taking a formal complaint. If this were the case, this would impede the College's role as a disciplinary body for the profession. 

 

It is not surprising that under all of the circumstances Bzura chose to pack it in and resign his position as incoming President of PARIM. The position is only a one year term. Bzura may well have felt that even were he to remain in his position, it would be a constant battle and a miserable situation for himself. He already had put out money from his own pocket in obtaining legal representation, and had to wonder whether it was financially worth continuing the fight. We must ask ourselves if Dr Theissen would have complained about Bzura if Bzura had made a statement in support of Newman's speech rather than against it?

 

For the Jewish community, the Bzura episode is most alarming. Bzura tried to raise attention to the plight of those who felt marginalized, isolated, harmed and hated by Newman's convocation speech. What are the chances that others from other ethnic communities will stand with the Jewish community if they may reasonably fear that they will be held up to hatred, contempt and ridicule by their colleagues for doing so? How likely is it that they have the courage to stand with us, if it will possibly hurt them in their career advancement of opportunities? And how will these issues all play out if in the future there are far fewer Jewish physicians and surgeons in Manitoba than there are now? 

 

College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba: Advice to the Profession: Maintaining Professional Obligations when Engaging on Public Platforms July 12, 2024

 

CPSM recognizes there are many complex and important issues facing society, both locally and globally and registrants may feel an obligation to respond. As members of a self-regulating profession who serve the public, registrants must consider how their words and actions are perceived by others, including those who hold different views.

Understand the impact of your words on the public and the profession


 

All CPSM registrants —physicians, residents, clinical assistants, physician assistants, medical students, and physician assistant students— must be well informed of the professional obligations and the potential dangers and repercussions of posting personal views online.

While social media facilitates public dialogue and the expression of opinions, it also has the potential to harm the public’s trust in the profession.

Maintaining professional conduct

While your intent may be to offer good-faith support for a cause or group, publicly sharing your views online can have unintended consequences. As a medial practitioner, your words carry significant weight and have the potential to cause harm. If one registrant’s actions are perceived negatively, it can be damaging to the credibility, trust, and respect of the entire profession.

Social media and other public forums amplify this impact and your digital footprint may have long-lasting consequences. Your words can go viral quickly, their reach going far beyond your intended audience, and screenshots may capture your words forever.

Ensuring public safety

CPSM’s role is to focus on registrants' conduct and ensure that no individual patient, colleagues, or communities feel isolated, harmed, or unsafe.

 

While expressing your views online may not trigger regulatory action, if the way you express those views makes any individual or segment of the population feel unsafe or compromises public confidence in the medical profession, CPSM is obliged to look into the matter.

Due to diverging opinions on various medical, political, social, and economical issues, anything posted in the public domain may be contested and result in a complaint to the College. CPSM is obligated to treat each complaint matter seriously and fairly and in accordance with current regulations and complaints processes.

Privacy Considerations

Respecting colleagues, patients, and all persons with dignity and respect are core ethical obligations.

Publicly sharing private or identifying information about an individual without their consent undermines the Professional Code of Ethics and Professionalism. Exposing personal information about others including names of individuals, their workplace, or other personal details, can lead to physical harm, harassment, and threats.

Abiding by the Code of Ethics and Professionalism is the foundation upon which we build trust, and ensure the highest quality of care.

Your commitment to these principles is crucial in maintaining a safe, trustworthy, and respectful environment for patients.

 

 
<<Previous Article       Next Article >>
Subscribe to the Winnipeg Jewish Review
  • JNF Canada
  • D&L Landscaping and Concrete
  • Dove Electric
  • Munroe Pharmacy
  • Lipkin Family
  • Gislason Targownik Peters
  • Orthodox Union
  • Coughlin Insurance Brokers
  • Taverna Rodos
  • Orthodox Union
  • Accurate Lawn & Garden
  • Artista Homes
  • Santa Lucia Pizza
  • Fetching Style
  • West Kildonan Auto Service
  • Josef Ryan
  • Ross Eadie
  • Preventative Health First
  • Fair Service
  • Nick's Inn
  • Red Top Drive Inn
  • Tradesman Mechanical
  • Cavalier Candies
  • Shoppers Drug Mart
  • Shoppers Drug Mart
  • Julia Penny
  • kristinas-greek
  • The Center for Near East Policy Research Ltd.
  • Sarel Canada
  • Roofco Winnipeg Roofing
  • Center for Near East Policy Research
  • Nachum Bedein
Rhonda Spivak, Editor

Publisher: Spivak's Jewish Review Ltd.


Opinions expressed in letters to the editor or articles by contributing writers are not necessarily endorsed by Winnipeg Jewish Review.