Local dentist could face sanctions following Appeal Court ruling

On August 17, 2015, the Hearing Tribunal of the ADA&C held a four day hearing into 35 allegations of unprofessional conduct, finding Dr. Zuk guilty of 21 allegations and imposed sanctions including a one-year suspension of his registration, ordered him to complete a 30 hour ethics course and $175,000 in costs.

The findings of unprofessional conduct fall into two main categories: alleged advertising by Dr. Zuk in various forms (newspapers, websites, bus benches, and his own published book) that breached rules on advertising in the Alberta Dental Association Code of Ethics, October 2007 and conduct by Dr. Zuk in relation to the investigation process.

The Court of Appeal of Alberta indicates through its findings that Dr. Zuk then appealed to the Council of the Appeal Panel of the ADA&C, with that appeal being heard in November of 2016. The Council dismissed Dr. Zuk’s appeal and ordered costs of the appeal in the amount of $51,761.31 for a total of $226,761.31.

Zuk then appealed that finding to the Court of Appeal of Alberta in February of this year.

The Court of Appeal of Alberta ruling states, though many of the ADA&C Hearing Tribunal’s conclusions are affirmed, Zuk’s appeal is allowed in part.

‘The finding of unprofessional conduct for the breach of an undertaking (First Notice of Hearing, allegations 21 and 22) is unreasonable, as is the Hearing Tribunal’s assessment of the gravity of Dr. Zuk’s failure to cooperate with the investigators. The matter is referred back to the Council (ADA&C) for consideration of sanction and costs, having regard to these reasons.’

Dr. Zuk says the dental authority (ADA&C) has essentially been trying to ‘police words’ on dentist’s advertising and websites to control a problem with something he says is totally unrelated to his business.

“It’s the over-treatment of patients by dentists who have been taking courses that have taught extreme makeovers,” explains Zuk. “What they tried to do is basically limit how many people were interested in this kind of thing by extreme censorship and I kind of got caught up in the sidelines because I was doing lots of advertising for alternative treatment. But it got me into a little squabble with orthodontists and they basically applied the rules that were supposed to reduce overtreatment in the cosmetic business but it ended up catching me.”

Zuk adds there’s also a side story to his roughly 10-year ordeal, his book about overtreatment in cosmetic dentistry.

“Alberta has been a hotspot for it and their advertising rules are supposed to stop it but it just hasn’t worked,” he laments. “About 10 years ago I started doing alternative types of orthodontics to basically get braces done quicker as an alternative to instant makeovers with porcelain. The cosmetic dentists would do instant orthodontics, meaning they drill the teeth straight and I thought that’s quite extreme and orthodontists were advertising braces that take four or five years and patients would often say ‘I don’t want to take that long’, so they basically went for the extreme makeover and had all their teeth drilled down.”

Zuk says that’s when he turned to a ‘middle of the road’ solution, short-term orthodontics.

“That’s become popular around the world, I didn’t invent it myself,” he explains. “My trade mark that I was using was ‘high speed braces’. That’s all the basic, same idea is just trying to offer a different type of treatment versus the traditional type, so it basically upset the orthodontists.”

“It’s basically been a molehill turned into a mountain,” continues Zuk. “No patients have complained, it’s just has to do with competitor complaints and they’re just being very, very stubborn. The lawyer in the position of complaints director, she’s never had dental training and when I ran for Council (ADA&C) and was elected, my platform was basically to replace her, so there’s obviously a personal vendetta here that she was having a chance now to use her authority to basically get me kicked in the teeth myself.”

Zuk feels it’s important to point out that advertising rules in the profession have now changed over the past 10 years.

“I was fighting to use my trade mark ‘High Speed Braces’ and I was advertising free whitening and offering a $15 discount on some mouth guards, so I got in trouble for a ‘Time Limited Discount’ and for advertising ‘Free Braces’,” recalls Zuk. “Well now the dental authority has reversed that so they’re now promoting free check-ups for kids in grade 1 and on a limited time basis as well so they’re trying to fine me for things that are now allowed.”

The Court of Appeal of Alberta ruling concludes if the parties are unable to agree about the costs of this appeal, Dr. Zuk may provide submissions within three weeks of this decision, with ADA&C to have a further two weeks to respond.

by Sheldon Spackman

Local dentist could face sanctions following Appeal Court ruling

What's Trending