Doctors Behaving Badly: Georgia ob/gyn made his office a singles bar

Kevin Jermaine Edmonds, a young ob/gyn with a brand new practice, presumably would have better luck than most trying to impress a woman he has met at a bar.

But why bother leaving the office at all when your calendar is full of women undressing and telling you the most intimate details of their lives?

Doctor-patient relationships are barred by state law and by long established medical ethics. In part, these relationships are discouraged because they can cloud a physician's judgment and potentially lead to patient harm.

Within about a year of Edmonds earning his license to practice medicine in Georgia, the ob/gyn started dating a patient referred to by the Georgia Composite Board of Medical Examiners as "C.G." He began "mentoring" her, the board wrote, "regarding her studies and career path." And, in case she wasn't certain that he was interested in her, he also sent her sexually graphic text messages.

He had a sexual relationship with the patient for about 16 months, the board wrote.

With the next woman, "L.R.", Edmonds told the board that this wasn't anything like his relationship with C.G. No. This time, he and the woman had sex first. Then he started seeing her as a patient. After a month of mixing both business and pleasure, they broke up.

Which brings us to "L.L." in January 2008. The board doesn't say how long she and the doctor dated or whether they were still dating when the board finally caught Edmonds.

Three patients in less than three years. And what was Edmonds' punishment?

In May 2008, his license was suspended for 30 days. He was required to seek therapy. He was prevented from examining patients in a closed room without a chaperone present. Two years after the suspension, in May 2010, the board extended these license restrictions for at least three years.

There is nothing specific in the board's order banning dirty text messages.

Final question: How did the board gather its evidence against Edmonds? Everything in the board's publicly available documents seems based on something Edmonds said. Did board investigators interview the three women involved? Did they interview any other patients? Did they review anyone's charts? Did they talk with staff? Relying solely on the doctor's version of events would undoubtedly skew the picture of what really is happening and whether Edmonds had done any lasting damage as a result.