A Las Vegas OB-GYN has become the target of an investigation by the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners. Several patients have come forward with accusations of sexual misconduct against the doctor.
If you believe you have been subjected to sexual misconduct as a patient of an OB-GYN or other physician in Las Vegas, contact the attorneys at Sam & Ash Injury Law to discuss your legal rights. You may be entitled to hold the doctor accountable and demand financial compensation for the harm you have suffered. You deserve What’s Right.
Who Is George Chambers?
George Chambers is a physician licensed to practice medicine in Nevada in 2003. His website stated that he specialized in obstetric care and gynecological surgery. Chambers also advertised himself as the “only board-certified obstetrician and gynecologist in Nevada who is also certified in sexual health medicine.” Until recently, Chambers also maintained an Instagram account where he called himself the “vagina whisperer.”
Chambers has become the subject of an investigation into allegations from three patients who alleged incidents between 2018 and 2020 where Chambers engaged in inappropriate sexual conduct.
Details of the Case
Three former patients of Chambers have come forward to accuse Chambers of sexual misconduct, including taking photos of their genitalia or offering to pay the patients to take nude photos of them, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. The first patient, identified in the State Board of Medical Examiners’ complaint as Patient A, allegedly saw Chambers for a consult for a torn perineum in November 2020.
Patient A alleged that Chambers used her cell phone to take photos of her vagina area and then asked her to text some of the photos to him. Patient A reported feeling uncomfortable sending the text due to concerns over the security of the data but sent the photos anyway. Patient A claimed that she felt “humiliated and sexually demeaned” by Chambers.
The state board’s complaint suggests that details in Patient A’s medical records do not correspond with the events that occurred during the examination. Patient A also claimed that Chambers attempted to insert his entire hand into her vagina during her exam, which caused her excruciating pain.
Patient B reportedly saw Chambers for several years before an incident allegedly occurred in October 2018. Patient B alleged that Chambers offered her $1,000 to take nude photographs of her that Chambers stated he would use in advertisements for his practice.
Patient B claimed that in her appointments with Chambers, he would appear “very focused on sex” and ask invasive questions, including about her sexual history and the rape she suffered at age 16. Patient B stated that while she initially considered Chambers kind and caring, her view of him changed when she overheard him making inappropriate comments about women and sharing details about Patient B’s rape with other nurses in his office.
Patient B alleged that in the October 2018 incident, Chambers asked her if she had ever posed nude and told her that he needed nude models to pose for his labiaplasty website. Patient B claimed that Chambers attempted to convince her to pose nude and offered to provide her with copies of the photos for her husband, although he also asked her not to tell her husband that he took the photographs.
Patient B further alleged that Chambers took out his phone, showed her a nude photo of a woman, and admitted that he had taken photos of other patients. Patient B claimed she felt embarrassed, violated, and angry and stopped seeing Chambers.
The third patient, Patient C, alleged a similar incident to the one described by Patient B. Patient C stated that she saw Chambers in October 2019 for a routine gynecological exam and complaints of pelvic pain. Patient C alleged that when she revealed to Chambers that she was suffering from financial difficulties, he offered her $1,000 to take photos of her nude body and vaginal areas for advertisements.
Chambers allegedly offered to provide her with copies of boudoir photos. Patient C stated that she found it odd that Chambers had solicited her to take photos of her vaginal area as he had never performed any cosmetic procedures on her in that area.
The State Board of Medical Examiners has filed an ethics complaint against Chambers, charging him with:
- Disruptive behavior
- Disreputable conduct
- Engaging in conduct intended to deceive
- Failure to maintain accurate medical records
- Continual failure to practice medicine properly
- Engaging in conduct that violates the trust of a patient and exploits the relationship with the patient for financial or personal gain
The board’s complaint claimed that Chambers had “demonstrated a pattern of failing to use the reasonable care, skill, or knowledge ordinarily used by obstetrician-gynecologists in good standing by repeatedly engaging in sexual improprieties with more than one patient.”
The board further alleged that Chambers “repeatedly exploited his relationships with patients and violated patients’ trust by engaging in sexual improprieties that constitute sexual misconduct” and “undermine the public’s trust and respect for the medical profession.” Since the State Board filed its complaint, several more women have come forward with additional complaints against Chambers, including one woman who has alleged that Chambers sexually assaulted her.
In a formal response, Chambers denied the board’s allegations that he had engaged in “disruptive, deceitful, or self-serving behavior” with Patients A, B, and C. Chambers further asserted, “Due to HIPAA laws and the ongoing investigation, I am limited in what I can say.”
Chambers claimed his “constitutional rights had been violated in a well-orchestrated manner. My name and reputation have been besmirched, but I am not allowed to reveal anything because of HIPAA.”
Chambers’ attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the state board’s complaint, claiming it had created “a lurid picture of [Chambers] as a sex fiend of some sort, preying on his patients for some twisted purpose of his own.” Chambers’ attorneys attacked the publication of “salacious content” in the complaint, claiming that it had “decimated” Chambers’ medical practice.
At a status conference, Chambers claimed that he had a chaperone with him at all times during exams, in contrast to the allegations of Patients A, B, and C, who claimed that Chambers came into the exam room alone during the alleged incidents.
Chambers agreed to a stipulation with the state board, which requires him to have a trained medical chaperone present during all patient interactions in non-hospital settings. Chambers must submit the name of any proposed chaperone to the state board’s investigative committee. Chambers further agreed to refrain from taking photos or videos of patients pending the state board’s complaint resolution.