Legal troubles are piling up for a dentist from the canton of Aargau. The practitioner is already under investigation for possible breaches of health legislation and simple bodily harm. He is accused in particular of having continued to practice after the withdrawal of his authorization to practice.
In another case, his conviction is now upheld. The Federal Court rejected his appeal against a verdict for forgery of titles, after the retrospective reconstruction of a patient’s medical file.
The facts date back to 2022. Two patients had asked the dentist to give them their medical records in order to obtain a second opinion. Despite a formal notice, they received nothing. The practitioner explained that the original electronic files had been lost, specifies medinside.ch.
A file recreated just before his hearing
Shortly before being interviewed by the police, the dentist created a new electronic file and sent a screenshot to investigators. But this version only reported a single consultation, while the patient concerned had been treated three times, according to the “Aargauer Zeitung”, which got its hands on the original documents.
A medical file has the value of proof
In his defense, the practitioner disputed that this way of proceeding could constitute forgery. The Federal Court did not follow it. This is the essential point of the judgment: a medical file is not a simple personal note from the doctor. As healthcare professionals have an obligation to document the treatments carried out, this information has particular probative value.
Creating an incomplete file after the fact and presenting it as the original documentation can therefore constitute intellectual forgery. The document does not need to be physically falsified: it is its misleading content and the way in which it is presented that poses a problem.
The dentist had already been found guilty by the district court, then by the Aargau courts. The Federal Court therefore definitively confirms its suspended sentence of 100 day fines of 130 €, or 13,000 €, as well as a fine of 2,600 €.
This conviction does not put an end to the practitioner’s troubles with the law. Other proceedings for breaches of health legislation and simple bodily harm are ongoing.
