Commentary references: bit.ly/MedBoardFraud Is it equitable for unaccountable medical board members to commit fraud whilst doctors that were providing good care are maliciously attacked by these unethical physiciains. The medical board committed six counts of fraud v. Dr. Antoine Adem for providing good medical care. This isnt the only time that they have engaged in such unethical and unprofession conduct. --------------------------------------------------------- October 14, 2014: regulatory background. Nearly every doctor in the country is working diligently to oppose the FTC and good lawyers such as Jarod Bona are bravely working to uphold the law. They are supposed to ensure quality, but permitting certain doctors to oversee fraud, & according to the medical boards reasoning, they should be as liable as the rest of us. I support transparency, but selectively reprimanding doctors with permanent revocation of licensure helps no one. First, of all, I was 100 miles from patients, and if the Board was concerned about patient care, then they would have investigated months* of poor care. Here is the reference that, by the boards reasoning of oversight responsibility, the medical board members are not innocent in the eyes of medical regulation. The Following report describes the Missouri Medical Boards case nature of reprimanding. ============================================================================================================ 7. In June 1978, Brockenbrough left Baltimore to practice at the University of Pennsylvania and was able to obtain licensure based on his recent FLEX. He was a thoracic surgery resident and assistant instructor in surgery. He had no licensure or malpractice problems during his time in Pennsylvania. 8. In September 1980, Brockenbrough moved to Los Angeles, California, to practice. He practiced with hospital privileges at 12 or 13 different hospitals for 17 years. The Malpractice Claim 9. In 1981, Brockenbrough faced the only malpractice claim of his career. The claim involved a woman suffering from reflux esophagitis. The patient was unable to sleep because when lying flat she would get heartburn from a reflux of stomach contents. 10. During the surgery to correct the condition, the patient coughed due to insufficient anesthesia, and the tube that Brockenbrough inserted into the esophagus perforated the esophagus. 11. Brockenbrough made the patient n.p.o. and treated the perforation with antibiotics and IV fluids. Brockenbrough visited the patient the morning after the procedure, and she was “doing fine.” ******************************************* 12. Someone transferred the patient from the intensive care unit and fed her lunch. The food passed through the perforation to cause infection. 13. Brockenbrough operated again to correct the problem, but the patient died weeks later due to complications from an incorrect dosage of morphine administered by a nurse. ************************************************* ======================================================================================================================== #unfathomable. Someone fed the person. The medical board reprimanded Dr. Brockenbrough. #Legislative #Judicial Doctors arent perfect, but reprimanding & denying a doctor a license primarily because someone feeds a person with an ***esophageal performation*** is not equitable. MEDICAL PRACTICE AS A COMPETITIVE BUSINESS ==================================================================================================================== The AMA used to oppose Medicare, but my impression is now they largely think it is a good thing for both doctors and society. Thus, I implore other physicians not to let the AMAs opposition to the Federal Trade Commission dissuade you from voicing public support in their upcoming United States Supreme Court of America case. The AMA opposed the FTC back in the 1970s regarding advertising. Third, the courts, which formerly kept the practice of medicine out of the reach of antitrust law, now regard the physician as just another person doing business, no longer immune from antitrust regulation. In 1975 the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that found that the business activities of professionals were properly subject to antitrust law.10 As a consequence, physicians can no longer act collectively on matters affecting the economics of practice, whether their intent is to protect the public or simply to defend the interests of the profession. Advertising and marketing by individual physicians, groups of physicians, or medical facilities, which used to be regarded as unethical and were proscribed by organized medicine, are now protected — indeed, encouraged —by the Federal Trade Commission. nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199109193251205 I would argue that the late Dr. Relman has a Harvard-view, of medical practice & peer review. Not all #AAMC training programs are equitable such as #Harvard and #UCDavis. When the Program Director does not know the difference between a sign and a symptom, and reprimands the resident for their own shortcoming, without any descriptive documentation, the assessment is disparaging, and might be considered abusive by some. In such cases it is important to get a #Lawyer involved early. Next, when covering the topic of peer-review, it is important to distinguish 1. Disciplinary peer-review: primary aim to punish someone: typical of pathology departments, and the hospital medical executive committees, with disruptive doctors. Some physicians get upset when they see administrative negligence harming women month after month. They have done everything within their ability to protect patients from the departments poor care, but cannot do it constantly. 2. Surgical Morbidity and mortality: & sometimes internal medicine & other specialties. These types of #PeerReview has constructive purposes, and it is important to not conflate the two as they are drastically different in purposes and effect. Some physicians suggest that peer-review will be affected by anti-trust activities. In reality it should be. However, to defend the unethical practice of the current peer review, aside form M&M, many doctors say that performance improvements will not go forward. Interestingly, outside of morbidity & mortality-type peer-review, many committees tacitly collude and drastically abuse their power of immunity. Many of the peer-review(non M&M) are not conducted in compliance with the AMA-code of medical ethics. I added my comments to the website, but they were likely too cutting and removed. As a physician, I think it is important to be objective, and if the actions that were conducted were cutting, then cutting words would be most apt to describe them. ******************************************* 12. Someone transferred the patient from the intensive care unit and fed her lunch. The food passed through the perforation to cause infection. 13. Brockenbrough operated again to correct the problem, but the patient died weeks later due to complications from an incorrect dosage of morphine administered by a nurse. ************************************************* As you can see from the above, this is only one of many examples where the Missouri Medical Boar demonstrated a lack of common sense, equity, fairness, and objective concern for the patient who is left without affordable care. The number of cases of medical board misconduct are growing, and in my humble opinion, the federal government should either (1) let physicians sue individual medical board members for their fraudulent crimes as Dr. Antoine Adem should be entitled to, or (2) provide quality control, oversight, and accountability of medical regulation. When one states actions have immediate effect in every other state, the action is synonymous with a monopoly, and the states should be held accountable to federal antitrust laws. -- American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) American Medical Association (AMA) #antitrust, #PeerReview #PR #peer #review Arnold Relman. SPECIAL ARTICLE SHATTUCK LECTURE The Health Care Industry: Where Is It Taking Us? Arnold S. Relman, M.D. N Engl J Med 1991; 325:854-859September 19, 1991DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199109193251205 nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199109193251205 International Federation of Medical Students Associations - EMR World Health Organization (WHO) Missouri State Medical Association - MSMA National Institutes of Health (NIH) Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Institute of Medicine #FTC #SCOTUS SCOTUSblog SCOTUS #moleg #mosen #mohouse #GOP #SenDems #hcsm Kindest regards, -BrettMD
Posted on: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 15:38:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015