,100 women who had surgery for breast cancer at Solihull Hospital and Good Hope Hospital in Sutton Coldfield have been recalled by the trust because they may need further treatment after undergoing botched procedures by surgeon Ian Paterson.
healthcare scandals, breast cancer scandals, VA Scandal, Medical Board Regulation, Excellence and many failing, sham peer review and the abuse of trust.
While the Board withheld documents from Dr. Mishler on the expressed basis of its policy of confidentiality, it violated that policy when it forwarded confidential material, including the transcripts of Dr. Mishler's conversations with an investigator, to Dr. Mishler's neurosurgical colleagues.
Finally, even though the Board had the right to obtain the records and Dr. Mishler did not, the Board attempted to shift the burden for the preservation of evidence to Dr. Mishler.
In short, we conclude that the Board's actions and the proceedings against Dr. Mishler constituted a disturbing abuse of its power.
Therefore, we reverse the disciplinary order of the Board in its entirety and dismiss all proceedings against Dr. Mishler with prejudice.
The Board's power was not exercised for the proper and commendable purpose of protecting 297*297 the public from incompetent and negligent physicians. Instead, the Board wielded its power to ruin the career of an outspoken physician while simultaneously protecting a possibly negligent or incompetent practitioner who had questionable billing procedures.
Also, while the Board used its own rules of confidentiality as an excuse to obstruct Dr. Mishler's access to evidence, it violated the same policy with respect to Dr. Mishler's confidential reports.
Despite the absence of this evidence—office records, X-rays, and diagnostic films— at the hearing,
a longtime military contractor, acting after a string of Army medical students testified that Dr. John Hagmann had subjected them to dangerous experiments and sexual exploitation.
occupational licensing that licensing increases costs and fails to improve quality,
patient deaths
the number of disciplinary actions made by state medical boards may not be a precise indicator of quality
for providing excellent patient care
wrongfully disciplined physicians for reporting their colleagues
State medical boards have increased the number of disciplinary actions against physicians since the 1980s.[10] However, the number of disciplinary actions made by state medical boards may not be a precise indicator of quality as some have wrongfully disciplined physicians for reporting their colleagues as well as for providing excellent patient care
Medical license from wikipedia - this article reviews the requirement of a medical license to practice medicine, compares medical regulation in several different countries, and discusses criticisms of state medical boards.
Freeman also appeals to novelty, writing that our licensing laws are old and relates this to the idea of general practitioners. However, the USMLE Step 3 was specifically designed to assess the ability of physicians to work unsupervised in an ambulatory care setting
Although there is more information than ever before, there is no evidence to assert that physicians are unable to look it up online, use team-based care, telemedicine, and to refer a patient that the provider is not comfortable in treating [1].
it demonstrates that for those reported to medical boards, the peer review process disciplines those with less training or the inability to qualify for or pass certification requirements.
This study about medical regulation in Missouri details the numerous errors in evaluating the care provided by Dr. Antoine Adem. The state medical board tried to discipline the cardiologist's medical license for allegedly providing negligent and unsafe patient care. Unfortunately, what this article highlights, is that it was not Dr. Adem who failed ot use his skills and knowledge in the duties of the profession, but it was the members of the Missouri Board of Registration for the Healing Arts who failed to demonstrate competent medical knowledge and sufficient skills to properly evaluate the medical care provided by their licensees. If a physician on the medical board is unable to evaluate the care provided by a licensee, then they may pose a danger to the public due to their incompetence and, at the very least, should be second-guessed.
Almost all of these cases are completely archived except for one file - that file is usually the ruling by the judge. In this case, someone archived the ruling that rebuked the Missouri State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts on every one of their 137 charges. However, the claim can still be found at https://archive.org/details/Medical-Board-vs-Paskon. #Healthcare
Case No.: #02-1491 HA
Title: State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts vs. Paskon, M.D., Seth
The UMKC Pathology Department permitted a prolonged ishemic time from January to June 2011 and this occured in spite of being informed about the unsafe care.
1. We always have an ischemic time of less than 30 minutes.
2. The Pathology Department "often[sic]" documents the ischemic time.