Practitioner update · Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
On 17 February 2021 the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal found that psychiatrist Dr Gregory Nicholas Pearson had engaged in professional misconduct, reprimanded him and fined him $15,000, in Health Ombudsman v Pearson [2021] QCAT 42.
- Decision
- Health Ombudsman v Pearson [2021] QCAT 42
- Tribunal
- Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
- Decision date
- 17 February 2021
- Outcome
- Reprimand and $15,000 fine
What the referral concerned
The Health Ombudsman referred disciplinary proceedings to the Tribunal in January 2020. The referral concerned Dr Pearson’s treatment of a female patient between 2010 and April 2017, on the Gold Coast and at his private rooms in Bangalow, NSW. It contained two allegations:
- that he failed to maintain professional boundaries with the patient over a period of time; and
- that he failed to appropriately address transference issues: from at least October 2012 he was aware of idealisation and eroticised transference by the patient towards him, but continued treating her without maintaining appropriate boundaries, did not seek advice from professional peers, and did not refer her to another practitioner.
The conduct
Dr Pearson admitted the conduct, and the parties filed an agreed statement of facts. The Tribunal’s reasons record that his boundary violations included inappropriate personal disclosures and comments during consultations, showing the patient inappropriate images, and sharing food and drink with her in sessions.
Outside consultations, the reasons record that in December 2012 he arranged by text to meet the patient at Byron Bay, where he sat with her in her car, kissed her and gave her a CD of music he had prepared for her. Over the course of the treating relationship they also exchanged text and WhatsApp messages about personal matters and her feelings towards him.
The Tribunal noted the boundary violations did not proceed to a sexual relationship.
The Tribunal's findings
Dr Pearson ultimately accepted that his conduct amounted to professional misconduct, and agreed to the sanctions the Health Ombudsman sought. The Tribunal found the conduct, viewed as one course of conduct, was professional misconduct. It described it as serious in the context of the special treating relationship between a psychiatrist and a vulnerable patient, and apt to undermine public confidence in the profession.
The Tribunal took into account that Dr Pearson had engaged an experienced psychiatrist as a clinical supervisor, completed education sessions, cooperated with the proceedings so the patient did not have to give evidence, and had no further notifications. It accepted that his actions showed some insight and remorse.
Orders
- Dr Pearson has behaved in a way that constitutes professional misconduct.
- He is reprimanded.
- He must pay a fine of $15,000 to the Health Ombudsman within six months.
- Each party bears its own costs.
Source: Health Ombudsman v Pearson [2021] QCAT 42, AustLII, accessed 20 October 2026.
