Go Ad Free

Former nurse practitioner Melissa Dore was in the Superior Court of Justice in Brampton, Ont., last Monday, although she’d rather be practicing medicine as opposed to lawyering.

Here’s the skinny: going back some five years ago, Dore issued medical exemption letters to patients who did not want to take vaccines for COVID-19.

Alas, the College of Nurses of Ontario (CNO) was not amused.

The CNO began to investigate Dore’s practice in November 2021. On February 7, 2022, the CNO decided to place restrictions on Dore’s registration certificate to practice nursing, thereby making her unemployable. Soon after, her licence was completely revoked by the CNO.

This turned out to be an economic death sentence for Dore. Her career was ruined, she lost her car, she lost her house. And Dore maintains she did absolutely nothing wrong. Indeed, she said she acted in an ethical fashion and is obliged to do so.

Dore was in court before a three-judge panel seeking to get an appeal from the CNO in order to get her licence reinstated.

Dore was granted 45 minutes to make her case. Here are some of the points she made:

• Dore said that she is not guilty of any misconduct whatsoever. All she did was offer her patients “informed consent.”
• Dore said she qualified for a lawyer regarding the allegations of professional misconduct against her. The Registered Nurses Association of Ontario agreed to provide a lawyer. But that lawyer later walked away from the case. Why? Dore said the lawyer told her: “Because it involves COVID.”
• Dore said the CNO “engaged in a malicious prosecution of me.”
• Dore said the CNO made many statements that could not be supported by the evidence, such as the allegation that Dore did not keep records. Further, Dore stated that the CNO said things about her that are “libelous.”
• Dore alleged the CNO failed to uphold its own bylaws.
• Dore said she would like to see an investigation of the CNO. A judge told her the court does not have the power to do so.
• Dore said that she is not guilty of any misconduct whatsoever. All she did was offer her patients “informed consent.”

Dore pointed out that the CNO embraces the Directive 6 Resource Guide. She said this directive supports the exemption letters she wrote. She noted that Directive 6 was written by Dr. Kieran Moore, Ontario’s Chief Medial Officer of Health. It states employers of healthcare providers must create a COVID-19 vaccine policy and suggests they offer their employees three options to be compliant with vaccine mandates:

a) Employee show proof of full vaccination.

b) Employee show proof of a medical exemption.

c) Employee show proof of attending an education session about COVID-19 vaccines.

Before declining a COVID-19 vaccine for any other reason than a medical reason, the session must at minimum address:

i) How the vaccines work

ii) Safety around development

iii) Benefits

iv) Risks

v) Side effects

• Dore said she merely gave patients the information they needed for an informed choice and it was always the patient’s decision not to take the COVID-19 vaccine, yet the CNO punished her nevertheless.
• Dore said the CNO claimed the COVID-19 vaccines were “safe and effective” even though the vaccines had only been available for 10 months and it was uncertain at this point how the vaccines would affect pregnant women.
• Dore claimed the CNO said there’s no such thing as informed consent. But Dore noted Dr. Moore stated the precise opposite.
• Dore claimed a CNO panel cited numerous allegations about her that were irrelevant and it was all done to make the case to yank her licence. She also said the CNO failed to explain how her conduct put the public in any danger.
• Near the end of her testimony, Dore said she wanted to call out the names of powerful people who were involved in her licence being suspended. A judge prevented her from doing so.

The court adjourned for a short afternoon recess. Upon returning, a judge told the lawyer representing the CNO that the panel does not have to hear from him. Court then adjourned for the day. It was baffling.

Regardless, the position of the CNO is that Dore’s behaviour vis-à-vis writing letters to exempt patients from taking the COVID-19 vaccine was “dishonourable” and “unprofessional.”

In the meantime, the panel has reserved judgment. Stay tuned for further details.