Court finds no consent or medical basis in shocking endoscopy room abuse case
A routine medical procedure turned into a criminal violation, exposing serious breaches of medical ethics and patient trust within a clinical setting in Singapore.
Conviction Over Endoscopy Room Incident
A 76-year-old doctor was sentenced to one week in jail on Jan 27 after being convicted of molesting a sedated female patient during a colonoscopy procedure. The offence took place on Dec 24, 2021, in an endoscopy procedure room, when the victim was 20 years old. Both the doctor and the hospital cannot be named due to a gag order protecting the victim’s identity.
Nurses Witnessed the Act
The incident was witnessed by two senior staff nurses present in the procedure room. Both testified that they saw the doctor using both hands to touch the victim’s breasts underneath her hospital gown, with one nurse noting that his hands were ungloved at the time. When questioned about consent, the doctor did not respond.
No Medical Justification Found
District Judge Shawn Ho ruled that there was no medical basis for examining the patient’s breasts, as she had been diagnosed with bleeding piles. The court heard unchallenged expert testimony confirming there was no clinical link between rectal bleeding and breast examinations, nor any implied consent for such contact.
Patient Was Unable to Consent
The victim testified that she was in a blackout state after being sedated with Dormicum and had no awareness of what occurred. An independent medical expert stated that consent cannot be obtained from a drowsy or sedated patient. The judge emphasized that the doctor himself had acknowledged the drug would render patients totally unaware.
Defence Arguments Rejected
The defence attempted to discredit one nurse’s testimony, suggesting bias due to alleged scolding by the doctor. However, both nurses denied this claim, and the judge noted their accounts were consistent, matter-of-fact, and credible. Claims that their testimonies were influenced by prior discussion were also dismissed by the court.
Sentencing and Professional Fallout
Despite defence pleas citing the doctor’s Stage 4 prostate cancer and limited life expectancy, the court rejected calls for a fine-only sentence. Prosecutors had sought a jail term of four to six weeks. Online records show the doctor is no longer listed in the Singapore Medical Council’s registry.
The case underscores the critical importance of consent, professional boundaries, and vigilance in healthcare settings. It sends a clear message across Singapore and the region that medical authority does not place anyone above the law, reinforcing patient protection as a non-negotiable standard.
Sources: Straits Times (2026) , CNA (2026)
Keywords: Doctor Molestation Case, Sedated Patient Abuse, Singapore Medical Court, Medical Ethics Violation, Sexual Assault Healthcare
