Ontario’s medical regulator has dropped its misconduct prosecution of a doctor it previously claimed made “misleading, incorrect or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures for COVID-19.”
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has withdrawn its allegations against Dr. Jean Marc Benoit. He was accused of failing to meet the “standard of practice of the profession,” failing to respond in a timely manner to a written inquiry from the college, and engaging in an act or omission that “could reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional.”
The hearing was scheduled to begin Monday and last more than five days, but it concluded shortly into the first day when Benoit pleaded “no contest” to failing to respond to CPSO communication. The college formally withdrew the rest of the allegations.
According to the Democracy Fund, a civil liberties charity that funded Benoit’s legal representation, Benoit criticized the prevailing belief in 2021 that everyone had to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, regardless of factors like natural immunity, personal risk profiles, and “the fact that the shots did not stop the transmission of infection.”
Benoit’s lawyer, Lisa Bildy of Libertas Law, lauded Benoit’s courage for speaking up.
“While many physicians had concerns about novel and potentially harmful public health measures, few were willing to risk the severe financial and professional consequences of speaking up, which led to an illusion of consensus,” said Bildy.
During his career as a family and emergency physician, Benoit has been the acting chief of staff and president of the Medical Staff Association at Brantford General Hospital and has written peer-reviewed medical literature.
He had never been disciplined in his profession before. The investigation followed two unnamed physicians reporting him to the college for his comments online in the spring of 2021.
At the beginning of the pandemic, Benoit kept up to date on COVID-19 data and developments. He advocated for hospitals through the government to “employ best practices in pandemic management.”
“He later moved his commentary to X, primarily posting about inadequate data, lockdown harms, conflicts of interest, treatment alternatives, and VAERS data (vaccine injuries). Ultimately, his posts became critical of the public health response and its adverse impacts on patients and the general public,” the Democracy Fund said.
Benoit said he respected the college’s responsibility to respond to concerns about physicians’ behaviour in a clinical setting but hopes they will take a “smoother” approach in the future that respects individual physicians’ rights and responsibilities to the public and their patients.
“During COVID, they went further by curtailing criticism of public health measures, perhaps to contain panic. This approach may have had unintended effects on public trust,” Benoit said.
He warned that in future emergency situations, “where facts and implications are not fully known, they should not be assumed.”
