Additional misconduct allegations leveled against Las Vegas OB-GYN

The Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners has filed an additional complaint against a Las Vegas OB-GYN, with six more patients claiming misconduct by Dr. George Chambers.

Some of the claims are similar to those in a September 2022 complaint by a medical board panel in which two patients said Chambers offered to pay them to pose nude and a third claimed that he conducted an inappropriate exam. New allegations include that he asked patients to help pay for his legal defense for the 2022 case.

The February complaint alleges multiple counts of malpractice; failure to maintain complete medical records; disruptive behavior; engaging in conduct that violates the trust of a patient and exploits the relationship with the patient for financial or other personal gain; and continual failure to practice medicine properly.

A proposed agreement to settle the complaint, scheduled to be heard Friday, keeps in place earlier requirements, including that he have a chaperone when seeing patients in a non-hospital setting and that he refrain from photographing them. It also requires further ethics and professional-boundaries training, along with reimbursement of additional board costs. And it requires Chambers to transition to an electronic medical records system.

The board factored into the settlement that the alleged incidents of inappropriate comments and touching happened before the board imposed discipline in connection with the original complaint.

“Incidents that occur after the remediation, I think those are going to be dealt with more harshly,” Sarah Bradley, board deputy executive director, said in an interview Wednesday.

Chambers’ attorney, Libo Agwara, declined to comment.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal has interviewed two of the three patients from the original complaint and other women who alleged misconduct.

The new complaint, amended in March, was issued by the board’s investigative committee.

Anonymous patients

The recent complaint describes allegations by six anonymous patients, referred to as patients A through F.

Patient A saw Chambers as a new patient in July 2022, an appointment in which he repeatedly used a slang term for ejaculating, and made other comments describing his own sexual history that made her uncomfortable. She also described discomfort with the exam, including the length and pressure of touch, according to the complaint.

Patient C stated that during pelvic exams, Chambers said he wanted “to make sure her Kegel muscles were strong enough to have a good sex life.” She said she had never sought advice from him regarding sexual health concerns or dysfunction.

According to the complaint, Chambers responded to the board that he tested patients’ pelvic floor strength because of his training in sexual health medicine.

However, according to the complaint, he failed to explain the purpose to the patient or to get her consent.

The patient also stated that he asked her if she would ever consider posing for nude photographs to appear in the Adult Video News Awards, an awards ceremony held for adult films each year in Las Vegas.

Chambers has said that he needed models to advertise his gynecological cosmetic surgery sub-specialty.

Patients D and E said Chambers had asked them to loan him money in increments of $500 and $1,000 to defend against disciplinary action brought by the medical board.

Chambers told the board that after speaking with his attorney, who advised against taking patients’ money, he gave four refunds.

Patient F saw Chambers for a sexual issue with her husband. According to the complaint, Chambers “used crude terms to say that the sexual issue was the fault of her husband” while examining her. He also asked to take pictures “because her vagina would look good in his advertisements,” the complaint states.

The complaint also states that medical records were handwritten and incomplete or illegible.

In the settlement agreement, Chambers admits to five violations of failing to maintain complete medical records and four violations of engaging in conduct that violates the trust of a patient and exploits the relationship.

He also agrees to complete 10 hours of continuing medical education in professional boundaries and ethics and to repay about $13,000 in expenses related to investigation and prosecution of the complaint.

Chance for a ‘better path’

In September 2023, the board determined that Chambers had violated the Medical Practice Act by offering two patients $1,000 apiece to pose nude for photographs. 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 then revoked Chambers’ license for two years but suspended the revocation as long as he complied with its conditions, including completing ethics and professional-boundaries training and paying fines and procedural costs.

In July 2024, the board’s investigative committee summarily suspended Chambers’ license for failure to meet a March deadline to fulfill those conditions. The suspension was lifted in October, with the board giving him additional time to meet the requirements.

Agwara, Chambers’ attorney, said in October that the probationary conditions had made it difficult for his client to obtain employment and pay the fees and costs.

In March, an order issued by the board stated that Chambers is still paying off $47,400 in costs and $5,250 in fines in connection with the original complaint. It gave him additional time to do so.

Bradley described the board’s approach as one of remediation.

“The intent is to remediate him and get him on a better path,” she said. “He gets a chance to get on a better path.”

Some patients who have filed complaints against Chambers say the doctor has had too many chances.

One former patient, Nicolette Matthews, said in a text message Wednesday that the board “disgusts” her and that it has not taken her complaint seriously.

Matthews, who has filed a lawsuit against Chambers, believes she is one of the women referenced in the board’s new complaint, although the more graphic details she provided are missing from it.

Bradley declined to respond to criticism of the board’s handling of the complaints.

When asked to describe the board’s aim, she said, “The board’s primary aim, as it always is, is to protect the public. But we do need evidence and other things to have sanctions.”

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.