License of Las Vegas OB-GYN George Chambers suspended by medical board

A state medical board committee has suspended the license of a Las Vegas OB-GYN who failed to comply with the board’s conditions after it found he had engaged in disreputable conduct with patients.

The investigative committee of the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners earlier this month summarily suspended the license of Dr. George Chambers. In September, the medical board found that he had violated the Medical Practice Act by offering two patients $1,000 apiece to pose nude.

The suspension resulted from his failure to complete mandated ethics and professional-boundaries training and to pay a $6,000 fine and $54,000 in procedural costs. Chambers had “willfully and knowingly violated a Board Order and is immediately suspended from the practice of medicine in the State of Nevada,” states the suspension order dated July 1.

A former patient who had filed a complaint praised the step.

“The suspension means he can’t practice, he can’t see patients. It’s something for now,” said Angela, one of two patients Chambers asked to pose nude for photographs that he said would be used to advertise his sub-specialty of gynecological cosmetic surgery, according to the board’s findings. Neither patient had the surgery.

“The women are safe for now, the patients,” said Angela, who wants to see the doctor’s license permanently revoked. She spoke to the Review-Journal on the condition that only her first name be used. The board did not include in its complaint the names of the three former patients whose claims formed the basis for the complaint.

Chambers’ attorney, Libo Agwara, declined to comment on the suspension.

Doctor’s practice ‘decimated’

In September, the board determined that Chambers had committed violations of the Medical Practice Act including two counts of engaging in conduct that violates the trust of a patient and exploits the relationship with the patient for financial or other personal gain; one count of continual failure to practice medicine properly; and one count of disreputable conduct.

It found that the preponderance of evidence did not support counts related to allegations of an inappropriate exam with a third patient, who described it as painful and humiliating.

The board revoked Chambers’ license for two years but suspended the revocation as long as he completed the mandated training and paid the fine and costs of the proceedings. It also required him to continue to have a board-approved chaperone present with patients and to refrain from photographing patients.

On March 15, the compliance deadline, he petitioned for a three-month extension. The petition states that Chambers’ practice has been “decimated.”

“He has tried looking for a job, but other providers will not hire him, as a result of the conditions placed on him by the Board,” the petition states. “The net effect of these restrictions is that he has not been able to make sufficient money to live on, let alone pay for the costs associated with the Board’s requirements.”

The physician has lost his home and has accrued $15,000 in legal bills, the petition states.

The petition also states that Chambers had completed one of the two mandated training courses prior to it being assigned by the board.

On June 7, at a board meeting that neither Chambers nor his attorney attended, the board declined to further extend the compliance deadline.

The suspension became effective July 3, said Sarah Bradley, the board’s deputy executive director.

A hearing before hearing officer Paul Lipparelli was held in Reno on July 18 to determine if the suspension could continue. Lipparelli will make a formal recommendation in the coming weeks regarding the appropriateness of the suspension, said Bradley, noting that he described the suspension as appropriate in the hearing.

The matter ultimately will come before the medical board, perhaps as soon as at its September meeting, she said. Among the board’s options would be to continue or lift the suspension and to revoke the license.

She noted that Chambers, who was licensed in Nevada in 2003, has had no prior disciplinary action.

“It’s not abnormal for a board to give a person a chance to get back into the good graces … to get back on a good path, and hopefully his conduct will not be the same,” she said.

The investigative committee filed a new complaint against Chambers on July 9 for both non-compliance with the board’s conditions and for not informing the board of his change in address.

“The Board does not know where Respondent is practicing medicine, and the Board is not able to reach Respondent by mail and is not able to personally deliver documents to Respondent,” the complaint states.

‘I deserve to have justice’

The Review-Journal interviewed two of the three women whose claims were included in the investigative committee’s original complaint against Chambers, including the one who said Chambers had conducted a painful and humiliating examination.

Several other former patients also have spoken with the Review-Journal about complaints they filed with the board against Chambers. One of these patients, Nicolette Matthews, a year ago filed a lawsuit that accused Chambers of sexual assault and battery.

A compliance status check is scheduled for Aug. 23. Matthews’ attorney had filed a motion to compel Chambers to provide responses to questions, to produce requested documents and for sanctions.

A complaint Matthews filed with the board in August 2022 has not resulted in the board filing a new complaint against Chambers.

“My case not even being heard is disgusting,” she said. “I deserve to have justice also, just like any of the other victims that went before the board.”

She added, “When I finally heard he got suspended, that was one of the best things I’d heard in a long time.”

Bradley said she could not comment on a pending complaint by the public.

“These are hard cases,” she said. “We’re trying really hard to follow our steps.”

Contact Mary Hynes at mhynes@reviewjournal.com or at 702-383-0336. Follow @MaryHynes1 on X. Hynes is a member of the Review-Journal’s investigative team, focusing on reporting that holds leaders and agencies accountable and exposes wrongdoing.