-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96222 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
TF
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 14183
posted
I read through it quickly and skimmed parts. Basically, his appeal was denied.
So, that means that the lower court ruling stands. The lower courts all upheld the medical board. This is what the medical board had ordered (reading from the link):
"‘‘As a result of these findings, the [board] ordered a reprimand, imposed fines totaling $10,000, and placed the plaintiff on probation for two years. In addition, the [board] required the appointment of a physician monitor to conduct regular reviews of the plaintiff’s patient records and meetings with the plaintiff."
Posts: 9931 | From Maryland | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
GretaM
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 40917
posted
This is terrible
So upset about this Posts: 4358 | From British Columbia, Canada | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TF: I read through it quickly and skimmed parts. Basically, his appeal was denied.
So, that means that the lower court ruling stands. The lower courts all upheld the medical board. This is what the medical board had ordered (reading from the link):
"‘‘As a result of these findings, the [board] ordered a reprimand, imposed fines totaling $10,000, and placed the plaintiff on probation for two years. In addition, the [board] required the appointment of a physician monitor to conduct regular reviews of the plaintiff’s patient records and meetings with the plaintiff."
OHHH... I only saw page one which says nothing.
So he can still practice. I hope he can do what he NEEDS TO DO for his patients!!!
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96222 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
Keebler
Honored Contributor (25K+ posts)
Member # 12673
posted
- The "appointment" of a physician monitor -- If the IDSA appoints, that would not be good. It does not say that he would be able to select the monitor for himself.
?
This really does sound like an anti-trust case. Where someone is held to conduct their business in just one way, the IDSA way. -
Posts: 48021 | From Tree House | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
TF
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 14183
posted
I remember what Burrascano said when he himself was ordered to hire a monitor. He said the cost of doing this was prohibitive! I think I remember something like $10,000 per month? So, this cost alone can put a doctor out of business. Having to pay this for the next 2 years. This may be why Dr. J appealed this all the way up. He may have to close down shop with this added expense. Just my guess.
The monitor is just to make sure that the doctor keeps complete records, etc. In Dr. Jones' case, I believe he took compassion on a mother and ordered treatment for a child he never saw. The mother told him things over the phone that led him to immediately help the endangered child.
I believe he knows never to do this again. (Have to see the patient before you try to help him.)
So, in his case, the monitor will be there to be sure he doen't help anyone this way again.
Posts: 9931 | From Maryland | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
That does sound prohibitively expensive. Arrgh. I feel for the children who will now suffer... and for their parents.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96222 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
surprise
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 34987
posted
What happens, and this has happened to bio- medical Dr.s treating autism,
is the parents divorce, it gets nasty, money, and this issue comes up (treated child for so and so by so and so means)
Now some autism Dr.s have a document that must be signed by BOTH parents that they agree to treatment, before starting treatment.
Because some have gotten sued, hauled before medical boards, after parents divorce/split up.
I believe this is also why this came up for Dr. J.
Furthermore, some states (the one I am in) you can have your child treated (prescriptions prescribed) by a Dr. practicing in the SAME state you reside in,
WITHOUT having physically seeing the child first- but must be seen in person sometime within the first 12 months to continue after that-
but of course, blood tests have been reviewed, other forms of recent testing, etc.
-------------------- Lyme positive PCR blood, and positive Bartonella henselae Igenex, 2011. low positive Fry biofilm test, 2012. Update 7/16- After extensive treatments, doing okay! Posts: 2518 | From USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
These are a few of the lower contribution examples. Contributions could also be higher, like if a core group wants to give $1000/month.
It could be set up with docs choosing which level to pledge at.
This would not be hard for them to do, as many charge pretty high patient fees.
Posts: 13116 | From San Francisco | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, that's not too bad, in the scheme of things, if this monitoring cost ends in March 2014.
Posts: 13116 | From San Francisco | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tincup
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 5829
posted
Yes, the monitoring has been ongoing- a pain in the back side- and VERY expensive- but he will do what must be done and not give up on helping the children. His love for them beats all.
Your donations help keep him in business. Very much so. Thank you ALL for that.
Some of the individual LLMDs (NOT ILADS) have been contributing to the monitoring fees to help him keep the doors open. They have been a real blessing. I don't know what he'd do without them, or what the parents of the children would do.
And blessed are the children who are helped by this dear and wonderful man and his staff.
poppy
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5355
posted
Keebler, anti-trust was the way the CT AG went after the IDSA several years ago (if I recall correctly). Unfortunately, that group then was able to appoint their own review board and the guidelines were not changed.
Then the govt run guidelines clearinghouse decided this review meant the guidelines could stay up past the usual 5 year sunset period. All around corrupt practices, and those medical boys can run circles around a legislator who wants to change them.
The Texas medical board is being sued for their corrupt practices (not lyme related in this suit apparently), so when someone here wins the lottery big, I suggest that would be one way to use the money.
Don't you drool at those big winners, even though the odds make it hopeless for all but that person.
[ 08-13-2013, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posts: 2888 | From USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[group hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic