Optometrist's bid for reinstatement after alcohol-related abuses refused

Benjamin Bolton's optometrist registration was cancelled in October, 2021, with a non-review period of 18 months after being convicted of 19 criminal offences between 2004 and 2017.

His work history includes working part-time in the Hunter Valley and Newcastle from February, 2017, as well as locum work.

The convictions included multiple counts of high-range drink-driving, assault, stalking/intimidation and resisting arrest.

The Health Care Complaints Commission found that he suffered an impairment in that he suffered from a mood disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, alcohol use disorder and personality vulnerabilities.

As a result, the commission has argued, Mr Bolton was not competent to practise optometry.

It was further alleged that Mr Bolton failed to comply with reporting requirements, failing to notify the National Board of charges and convictions within the requisite seven days and failing to disclose in annual renewal statements his criminal history and impairments.

There had been a 'steady escalation' in Mr Bolton's criminal conduct, which included offending against his father and a work colleague, which were "incompatible with respect for the health, welfare and safety of the public".

Mr Bolton was jailed twice, once for 16 months over an assault on his 67-year-old father in his father's home during which he punched his father in the head, kicked and punched him on the ground, forced him to stand naked in front of a mirror and hit him with a plastic cricket bat, in 2017.

He was jailed a second time in January, 2018, after going to his employer's house and head-butting doors, and resisting arrest, court documents say.

Just days before his hearing to have his registration reinstated. Mr Bolton offended again, this time in an incident involving his 76-year-old mother.

He had been drinking in the lead-up to that incident, starting on a few beers after finishing work about 3pm on Tuesday, October 31, 2023.

He told the Commission at a hearing in November that he had not reached a position where he could abstain from drinking, and had continued to drink since the incident.

He said he knew that alcohol underpinned his criminal history and the majority of his interpersonal relationship issues, and that it was one of, if not the most significant barrier to his optometry registration being reconsidered.

But, to claim that he would not consume alcohol form that point forward "would be spurious", he said.

In refusing his application, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal said that his evidence, while frank, demonstrated a lack of insight into the impact of his drinking.

There was no evidence that he no longer had the impairment at the centre of the commission's original decision, or that he had since proved he was a fit and proper person to be working in the profession of optometry, the panel of four members concluded.