Nature of Action and Reasons: On June 14 to 17, and 25, 2021, a panel of the Discipline Committee convened to hear a formal citation issued to Steven Anderson. The citation set out allegations regarding Mr. Anderson’s conduct in relation to five female patients and one male patient. Mr. Anderson was a registered massage therapist at the time of the events described in the citation but ceased to be a registrant of the College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia (“CMTBC”) on February 1, 2019, when his registration was automatically cancelled due to his non-renewal of his registration. Prior to February 1, 2019, Mr. Anderson’s registration was suspended pending the completion of the investigation or a discipline hearing, whichever should come later.
Following the discipline hearing, the Discipline Committee panel issued a decision and reasons dated May 18, 2022 (PDF) in which the panel made several determinations of professional misconduct and unprofessional conduct in relation to the allegations made in the citation. These findings are summarized below.
Subsequently, after considering submissions from Mr. Anderson and from the College on penalty and costs, the panel issued an order and reasons on penalty and costs dated October 20, 2022 (PDF). A summary of the order may be found below under the heading “Panel’s Decision dated October 20, 2022.”
Panel’s Decision dated May 18, 2022
Patient 1 (A.A.)
The panel found that in 2014, while providing massage therapy and having provided massage therapy to Patient 1, Mr. Anderson:
The panel found that in 2019, during the investigation into Patient 1’s complaint, Mr. Anderson:
The panel determined that by engaging in this conduct, Mr. Anderson breached sections 1(1)(c) and 2(a) of Schedule C of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect, sections 3(a) and 9(d) of Schedule D of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect, and section 4(a)(iv) and (v) of Schedule E of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect. The panel also determined in relation to these findings that Mr. Anderson failed to comply with a standard or a limit imposed under the Health Professions Act (the “Act”) and that he committed professional misconduct and unprofessional conduct.
Patient 2 (B.B.)
The panel found that in 2014, while providing massage therapy and having provided massage therapy to Patient 2, Mr. Anderson:
The panel found that in 2019, during the investigation into Patient 2’s complaint, Mr. Anderson:
The panel determined that by engaging in this conduct, Mr. Anderson breached section 2(a) of Schedule C of the CMTBC’s Bylaws then in effect, section 3(a) of Schedule D of the CMTBC’s Bylaws then in effect, and section 4(a)(iv) and (v) of Schedule E of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect. The panel also determined in relation to these findings that Mr. Anderson committed professional misconduct.
Patient 3 (C.C.)
The panel found that in 2014, while providing massage therapy and having provided massage therapy to Patient 3, Mr. Anderson:
The panel found that in 2019, during the investigation into Patient 3’s complaint, Mr. Anderson:
The panel determined that by engaging in this conduct, Mr. Anderson breached section 2(a) of Schedule C of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect, sections 3(a) and 9(d) of Schedule D of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect, and section 4 (a)(iv) and (v) of Schedule E of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect. The panel also determined in relation to these findings that Mr. Anderson committed unprofessional conduct.
Patient 4 (D.D.)
The panel found that in 2014, while providing massage therapy and having provided massage therapy to Patient 4, Mr. Anderson:
The panel found that in 2019, during the investigation into Patient 4’s complaint, Mr. Anderson:
The panel determined that by engaging in this conduct, Mr. Anderson breached section 1 (1)(c) of Schedule C of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect, and section 9 (d) of Schedule D of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect. The panel also determined in relation to these findings that Mr. Anderson breached a standard imposed under the Act, and that he committed unprofessional conduct.
Patient 5 (E.E.)
The panel found that in 2016, while providing massage therapy services to Patient 5, Mr. Anderson:
The panel found that in 2018, during the investigation into Patient 5’s complaint, Mr. Anderson:
The panel determined that by engaging in this conduct, Mr. Anderson breached sections 3(1)(a)(vii) and (viii), and 3(2) of Schedule E of the CMTBC Bylaws then in effect. The panel also determined that in relation to these findings Mr. Anderson committed professional misconduct.
Patient 6 (F.F.)
The panel found that in 2017 and 2018, during the investigation into Patient 6’s complaint, Mr. Anderson:
The panel determined that by engaging in this conduct, Mr. Anderson committed professional misconduct.
In summary, the panel accepted the evidence of each of the complainants and found that the College had proved each of the allegations set out in the citation. The hearing will now proceed to a decision on penalty and costs, as outlined below.
The panel found that in certain instances Mr. Anderson obstructed a College Investigator in the lawful exercise of her powers of investigation, contrary to s. 31(1) of the Act, and that he failed to respond to inquiries, requests, and directions from the College in a professional and responsive manner, contrary to section 28 of the Code of Ethics, then in effect.
Panel’s Decision dated October 20, 2022
The panel determined that it had jurisdiction to impose any of the penalties listed in s. 39(2) of the Act on a former registrant, ordered that Mr. Anderson’s registration with CMTBC be cancelled as of October 20, 2022, and further ordered that he:
The panel stated in its decision that:
The panel noted that, should Mr. Anderson apply for reinstatement on or after October 20, 2037, the Registration Committee of CMTBC ultimately has the power to determine whether or not to grant reinstatement, and if does so, to determine whether he must fulfil any other requirements and conditions at that time. The panel further noted that in order to maintain public confidence in the profession and provide a sufficient deterrent, it was necessary and appropriate, in this case, to impose a fine in addition to the cancellation of Mr. Anderson’s registration.
The panel stressed that there is a strong need to express to Mr. Anderson and to other members of the profession that this type of conduct is unacceptable. The public must have confidence that members of the profession will cooperate with their regulators and will be held to account when they fail to do so.
Copyright © 2023 College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia. All Rights Reserved.