Texas and US government compete with me, a primary care physician, to provide medical care, strangling impetus for reform. It's competition which removes the fluff resulting from the unnecessary utilization of resources. Below are some of the concepts being discussed by "Million Med Marchers", a conservative group of doctors and patients who want the government out of medicine.
I keep adding to this, but try as I may, can't get it up to 2074 pages.
1. Make insurance portable across state lines.
2. Make insurance subject to the same anti-trust limitations as all other businesses. Repeal the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 (isn't that about when the trouble began?)
3. If a new law must be passed, how about one that forces government and big corporations to offer a choice of insurance companies? In Texas, all state employees have but one choice: Blue Cross Blue Shield. BCBS has 1/3 of the Texas healthcare insurance market. BCBS owns the Texas Academy of Family Physicians, the Texas Medical Association, and the Texas Medical Board. Nice and tidy, isn't it? Unfortunately, many doctors are for sale; many others "fear retaliation" and thus don't speak out.
Wonder how many docs, other than the ones I know about, were bribed by BCBS in order for them to reach a 1/3 share of the market...
4. Give small businesses and individuals the same tax credits for the purchase of insurance as are available to large corporations.
5. Elected government officials should accept the same plan, with the same restrictions and mandates, as everyone else.
6. Listen to healthcare workers who are whistleblowers; we are telling you where the problems are.
7. Healthcare licensing boards around the country are for sale. They do not generally serve the public need and are compromised by conflicts of interest. Contrary to what is commonly thought, medical boards are not dominated by the AMA. The AMA is dying and does not represent the views of the majority of physicians. It is rife with conflicts of interest. This is not good for healthcare. In Texas, the Texas Medical Board protects bad doctors and harasses conscientious doctors who blow the whistle.
8. Make generous use of high deductible health plans; limit restrictions; encourage small businesses to self insure in order to increase deductibles even further. An individual working for a small business could, for example, choose a plan with a $10,000 deductible; the business might self insure its employees up to $25,000. Combine this with judicious use of tax credits for healthy habits and preventive care.
9. Health Savings Accounts UN-tethered to health insurance companies.
10. Medicaid abuse and Social Security Disability abuse overwhelm us now. With Obamacare, everything will be either Medicaid, Medicare, or VA. It's going to bankrupt us. Medicaid consumes over 25% of the Texas state budget. In Tennessee, it's over 40%. What is it in your state?
11. A few states, thankfully, have meaningful caps on noneconomic damages for medical malpractice. This doesn't make the lawyers happy, but when lawyers are happy, the rest of us aren't. Texas' $200,000 cap has brought companies back to Texas so that there is more competition. Malpractice rates have gone down. Other states with caps in this range are seeing malpractice litigation turn the corner.
12. Require Medicaid recipients to pay co-pays and allow them to part of their fees in the form of work.
13. Limit advertising for durable medical equipment paid for by insurance and Medicare.
14. Limit advertising for medical malpractice.
15. NO PUBLIC FUNDING for law schools!
16. Require, incrementally, every US physician, in a random rotation, to review medical malpractice cases and medical board cases for evidence of either malpractice or for determination of a need for discipline; give Continuing Medical Education credit for hours worked.
17. Provide other protections from retaliation against whistleblowers.
18. Protect healthcare workers from retaliation by law in both government and private industry. Require due process and other constitutional rights in hospital peer review and medical licensing.
19. Who in the heck do the so-called "experts" in healthcare policy hired by the think tanks think they are? Yes, they have some good ideas, but they have no idea, for example, what it will do to medicine in the long run to have nurse practitioners practicing medicine and not doctors.
Do you hear Obama making any of these suggestions? I don't. Could it be that he really doesn't want private healthcare to survive?
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009
More Texas Corruption Linked to Texas Medical Board and Keith E Miller MD
Keith E Miller MD is a dirty doctor; his nurse, Bridget Yvette Hughes, Bridget Yvette Hughes is a dirty nurse; his District Attorney, Lynda Russell , is a dirty DA...and it looks like they are all about to get busted by the ACLU because Shelby County's lily-white DA and cops are targeting blacks in their asset forfeiture racket.
Thank God the ACLU cares about what happens to blacks.
Thank God the ACLU cares about what happens to blacks.
What is happening as a result of Dr. Miller's avarice is a shame to a free society. It, unfortunately, is business as usual in Austin.
I and several other persons have detailed information of fraud and abuse of state funds at the Texas Medical Board and the Texas Board of Nursing, and in persons formerly affiliated with the same agencies.
All of this information has been published on the world wide web and is known by numerous physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals. Other condemning testimony is contained in the thousands of pages of depositions taken by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons in its federal lawsuit against the TMB.
After accumulating extensive evidence of corruption among several members of the TMB and its Executive Director Mari Robinson, I wrote several letters to the agency in late 2008 and early 2009 to complain about her. There was no response.
Why would a doctor investigate her own licensing agency?
I have been investigating them since 2006, when Doug Curran MD, as president of the Texas Academy of Family Physicians, bribed Dr. Miller to suspend and ultimately revoke my medical license. I thought it was odd that they opened up a full-fledged investigation of me because I, admittedly, failed to release a single lab report to a single patient in a timely manner. In their first proposed order, which I refused to sign, they claimed I was a "danger to the public", and that my behavior was "dishonorable and unprofessional". I took personal offense and vowed to find out what was really motivating their witch hunt.
Evidence poured in from sources all over Texas. I wasn't the only one interested. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging multiple abuses. Texas now has the well-recognized distinction of having "the worst medical board in the country".
Keith Miller is infamous for being the former worst medical board member of the worst medical board in the country. He was Chairman of the TMB's Disciplinary Process Review Committee, and unfortunately for him, he was the crook Dr. Curran bribed. I know where I stand with Miller because he's suing me for slander. In a recent hearing in the matter, he said he'd never met anyone like me!
My evidence forced his resignation from the TMB in August, 2007. I don't think he counted on the $1 million coverage I have to defend against allegations of slander. That allows me the pleasure of proving everything I say about him is true.
Miller was first to go.
Executive Director Donald Patrick MD JD was second, in August, 2008.
Roberta Kalafut DO, President, was third, in December, 2008.
The consensus is that Mari Robinson is next.
Now, quite honestly, there have been several other changes for which I can't claim any responsibility. And Dr. Steve Hotze and the AAPS played a vital role.
On February 6, 2009, I testified openly at a regular meeting of the whole board, during the time allowed for public testimony, for 10 minutes, and enumerated various state and federal crimes for which I have personal knowledge, that Robinson has committed. These include perjury in hearings before the state legislature, destruction (or causing it) of US Mail, repeated egregious abuses of office, altering (or causing it) Texas Department of Public Safety documents, and the targeting of whistleblowing doctor who cross her.
When I finished, there was silence. I asked if there were any questions. There were none.
Now the TMB has kept three or four mega-investigations open on me most of the time since 2006. None of them were prompted by complaints about the quality of medical care I have provided conscientiously for twenty-six years as a primary care physician.
A couple of weeks later, with no new evidence and no new complaint, and no allegations of harm to any patient, I received a letter from Mari: We plan to suspend your license.
You've got to be kidding, you Devil.
On March 24, 2009, about six weeks after I truthfully accused her of being a criminal, Mari Robinson had my license suspended on an emergency basis! What arrogance! ...after serving Victoria honorably for twenty-six years, and never having any complaint remotely related to patient care! THAT, Texas, is how the Texas Medical Board spends your money.
I do acknowledge this problem: In August, 2009, I was convicted of two counts of "fleeing arrest with a deadly weapon" back in September, 2007.
Turns out, I was on my way to a medical meeting in Chicago, to talk to Dr. Curran about my allegations against him. Now, I have no evidence (beyond circumstantial) that Curran had anything to do with the Texas Department of Public Safety officers who stopped me, but the circumstances were awfully odd.
When will the state of Texas own up to its crimes?
Monday, November 16, 2009
A look at the Texas Medical Practice Act
...particularly Sections 164.004 and 164.005.
Here is an audio file of my discussion of violations of the Medical Practice Act by the Texas Medical Board:
http://www.mediafire.com/?o0mjwmgmitw
(If your media player won't play this file, use VLC Media Player)
§164.003. Informal Proceedings (State Office of Administrative Hearings [SOAH] is the corresponding 'formal proceeding')
(a) The board by rule shall adopt procedures governing:
(1) informal disposition of a contested case under Section 2001.056, Government Code; and
(2) informal proceedings held in compliance with Section 2001.054, Government Code.
(b) Rules adopted under this section must require that:
(1) an informal meeting in compliance with Section 2001.054,1 Government Code (this is the "Texas Administrative Code"), be scheduled not later than the 180th day after the date the complaint is filed with the board under Section 154.051, unless good cause is shown by the board for scheduling the informal meeting after that date;
(2) the board give notice to the license holder of the time and place of the meeting not later than the 30th day before the date the meeting is held;
(3) the complainant (The board does not allow the doctor and complainant to meet.) and the license holder be provided an opportunity to be heard;
(4) the board’s legal counsel or a representative of the attorney general be present to advise the board or the board’s staff; and
(5) a member of the board’s staff at the meeting present to the board’s representative the facts the staff reasonably believes it could prove by competent evidence or qualified witnesses at a hearing.
(c) An affected physician is entitled to:
(1) reply to the staff’s presentation; and
(2) present the facts the physician reasonably believes the physician could prove by competent evidence or qualified witnesses at a hearing.
(d) After ample time is given for the presentations, the board representative shall recommend that the investigation be closed or shall attempt to mediate the disputed matters and make a recommendation regarding the disposition of the case in the absence of a hearing under applicable law concerning contested cases.
(e) If the license holder has previously been the subject of disciplinary action by the board, the board shall schedule the informal meeting as soon as practicable but not later than the deadline prescribed by Subsection (b)(1).
§164.0035. Dismissal of Baseless Complaint
If, during the 180-day period prescribed by Section 164.003(b)(1), the board determines that the complaint is a baseless or unfounded complaint, the board shall dismiss the complaint and include a statement in the records of the complaint that the reason for the dismissal is because the complaint was baseless or unfounded. The board shall adopt rules that establish criteria for determining that a complaint is baseless or unfounded.
We need to know what these criteria are.
§164.004. Compliance With Due Process Requirements
(a) Except in the case of a suspension under Section 164.059 or under the terms of an agreement between the board and a license holder, a revocation, suspension, involuntary modification, or other disciplinary action relating to a license is not effective unless, before board proceedings are instituted:
(1) the board gives notice, in a manner consistent with the notice requirements under Section 154.053, to the affected license holder of the facts or conduct alleged to warrant the intended action; and
(2) the license holder is given an opportunity to show compliance with all requirements of law for the retention of the license, at the license holder’s option, either in writing or through personal appearance at an informal meeting with one or more representatives of the board.
(b) If the license holder chooses to personally appear and an informal meeting is held, the board’s staff and the board’s representatives are subject to the ex parte provisions of Chapter 2001, Government Code, with regard to contacts with board members and administrative law judges concerning the case.
§164.005. Initiation of Charges; Formal Complaint
(a) In this section, “formal complaint” means a written statement made by a credible person under oath that is filed and presented by a board representative charging a person with having committed an act that, if proven, could affect the legal rights or privileges of a license holder or other person under the board’s jurisdiction.
This is analogous to a "probable cause affidavit" in criminal law. The fact that the analogy is made might make it feasible to use "the rights of the accused in criminal prosecutions" clause in the US Constitution: to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
(b) Unless otherwise specified, a proceeding under this subtitle or other applicable law and a charge against a license holder may be instituted by an authorized representative of the board.
(c) A charge must be in the form of a written affidavit that: This is what we need, but it is not done! TMB should keep those affidavits on file and make them subject to review by the legislative oversight committees
(1) is filed with the board’s records custodian or assistant records custodian; and I want to see the affidavit and the complaint filed against me which precipitated my license suspension; there wasn't one!
(2) details the nature of the charge as required by this subtitle or other applicable law.
(d) The board president or a designee shall ensure a copy of the charges is served on the respondent or the respondent’s counsel of record.
(e) The president or designee shall notify the State Office of Administrative Hearings of a formal complaint.
(f) A formal complaint must allege with reasonable certainty each specific act relied on by the board to constitute a violation of a specific statute or rule. The formal complaint must be specific enough to:
(1) enable a person of common understanding to know what is meant by the formal complaint; and
(2) give the person who is the subject of the formal complaint notice of each particular act alleged to be a violation of a specific statute or rule.
(g) The board shall adopt rules to promote discovery by each party to a contested case.
§164.006. Service of Notice
(a) Service of process to notify the respondent of a hearing about the charges against the person must be served in accordance with Chapter 2001, Government Code.
(b) If service described by Subsection (a) is impossible or cannot be effected, the board shall publish once a week for two successive weeks a notice of the hearing in a newspaper published in the county of the last known place of practice in this state of the person, if known.
(c) If the license holder is not currently practicing in this state as evidenced by information in the board files, or if the last county of practice is unknown, the notice shall be published in a newspaper in Travis County.
(d) If publication of notice is used, the date of hearing may not be earlier than the 10th day after the date of the last publication.
§164.007. Administrative Hearings; Confidentiality Issues
(a) The board by rule shall adopt procedures governing formal disposition of a contested case under Chapter 2001, Government Code. A formal hearing shall be conducted by an administrative law judge employed by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. After receiving the administrative law judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, the board shall determine the charges on the merits.
(b) Notwithstanding this subtitle or other law, the board may employ, retain, and compensate:
(1) attorneys, consultants, and other professionals as necessary and appropriate to serve as board consultants or special counsel to prosecute complaints filed with the board on behalf of the hearings division and investigating division; and
(2) court reporters and other staff necessary to prepare for or represent the board in the hearings authorized by this section.
(c) Each complaint, adverse report, investigation file, other investigation report, and other investigative information in the possession of or received or gathered by the board or its employees or agents relating to a license holder, an application for license, or a criminal investigation or proceeding is privileged and confidential and is not subject to discovery, subpoena, or other means of legal compulsion for release to anyone other than the board or its employees or agents involved in discipline of a license holder. For purposes of this subsection, investigative information includes information relating to the identity of, and a report made by, a physician performing or supervising compliance monitoring for the board.
(d) Not later than the 30th day after the date of receipt of a written request from a license holder who is the subject of a formal complaint initiated and filed under Section 164.005 or from the license holder’s counsel of record, and subject to any other privilege or restriction set forth by rule, statute, or legal precedent, and unless good cause is shown for delay, the board shall provide the license holder with access to all information in its possession that the board intends to offer into evidence in presenting its case in chief at the contested hearing on the complaint. The board is not required to provide:
(1) a board investigative report or memorandum;
(2) the identity of a nontestifying complainant; or
(3) attorney-client communications, attorney work product, or other materials covered by a privilege recognized by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure or the Texas Rules of Evidence.
(e) Furnishing information under Subsection (d) does not constitute a waiver of privilege or confidentiality under this subtitle or other applicable law.
(f) Investigative information in the possession of the board or an employee or agent relating to discipline of a license holder may be disclosed to:
(1) the appropriate licensing authority of:
(A) another state; or
(B) a territory or country in which the license holder is licensed or has applied for a license; or
(2) a medical peer review committee reviewing an application for privileges or the qualifications of the license holder with respect to retaining privileges.
(g) If investigative information in the possession of the board or its employees or agents indicates that a crime may have been committed, the board shall report the information to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
(h) The board shall cooperate with and assist a law enforcement agency conducting a criminal investigation of a license holder by providing information that is relevant to the criminal investigation to the investigating agency. Information disclosed by the board to an investigative agency remains confidential and may not be disclosed by the investigating agency except as necessary to further the investigation.
§164.008. Right to Counsel
In a hearing involving a disciplinary action under this subtitle, the respondent is entitled to appear personally, by counsel, or both.
§164.009. Judicial Review
A person whose license to practice medicine has been revoked or who is subject to other disciplinary action by the board may appeal to a Travis County district court not later than the 30th day after the date the board decision is final.
Texas Government Code
§ 2001.054. LICENSES.
(a) The provisions of this chapter concerning contested cases apply to the grant, denial, or renewal of a license that is required to be preceded by notice and opportunity for hearing.
(b) If a license holder makes timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a license or for a new license for an activity of a continuing nature, the existing license does not expire until the application has been finally determined by the state agency. If the application is denied or the terms of the new license are limited, the existing license does not expire until the last day for seeking review of the agency order or a later date fixed by order of the reviewing court.
(c) A revocation, suspension, annulment, or withdrawal of a license is not effective unless, before institution of state agency proceedings:
(1) the agency gives notice by personal service or by registered or certified mail to the license holder of facts or conduct alleged to warrant the intended action; and
(2) the license holder is given an opportunity to show compliance with all requirements of law for the retention of the license.
(d) A license described in Subsection (a) remains valid unless it expires without timely application for renewal, is amended, revoked, suspended, annulled, or withdrawn, or the denial of a renewal application becomes final. The term or duration of a license described in Subsection (a) is tolled during the period the license is subjected to judicial review. However, the term or duration of a license is not tolled if, during judicial review, the licensee engages in the activity for which the license was issued.
Here is an audio file of my discussion of violations of the Medical Practice Act by the Texas Medical Board:
http://www.mediafire.com/?o0mjwmgmitw
(If your media player won't play this file, use VLC Media Player)
§164.003. Informal Proceedings (State Office of Administrative Hearings [SOAH] is the corresponding 'formal proceeding')
(a) The board by rule shall adopt procedures governing:
(1) informal disposition of a contested case under Section 2001.056, Government Code; and
(2) informal proceedings held in compliance with Section 2001.054, Government Code.
(b) Rules adopted under this section must require that:
(1) an informal meeting in compliance with Section 2001.054,1 Government Code (this is the "Texas Administrative Code"), be scheduled not later than the 180th day after the date the complaint is filed with the board under Section 154.051, unless good cause is shown by the board for scheduling the informal meeting after that date;
(2) the board give notice to the license holder of the time and place of the meeting not later than the 30th day before the date the meeting is held;
(3) the complainant (The board does not allow the doctor and complainant to meet.) and the license holder be provided an opportunity to be heard;
(4) the board’s legal counsel or a representative of the attorney general be present to advise the board or the board’s staff; and
(5) a member of the board’s staff at the meeting present to the board’s representative the facts the staff reasonably believes it could prove by competent evidence or qualified witnesses at a hearing.
(c) An affected physician is entitled to:
(1) reply to the staff’s presentation; and
(2) present the facts the physician reasonably believes the physician could prove by competent evidence or qualified witnesses at a hearing.
(d) After ample time is given for the presentations, the board representative shall recommend that the investigation be closed or shall attempt to mediate the disputed matters and make a recommendation regarding the disposition of the case in the absence of a hearing under applicable law concerning contested cases.
(e) If the license holder has previously been the subject of disciplinary action by the board, the board shall schedule the informal meeting as soon as practicable but not later than the deadline prescribed by Subsection (b)(1).
§164.0035. Dismissal of Baseless Complaint
If, during the 180-day period prescribed by Section 164.003(b)(1), the board determines that the complaint is a baseless or unfounded complaint, the board shall dismiss the complaint and include a statement in the records of the complaint that the reason for the dismissal is because the complaint was baseless or unfounded. The board shall adopt rules that establish criteria for determining that a complaint is baseless or unfounded.
We need to know what these criteria are.
§164.004. Compliance With Due Process Requirements
(a) Except in the case of a suspension under Section 164.059 or under the terms of an agreement between the board and a license holder, a revocation, suspension, involuntary modification, or other disciplinary action relating to a license is not effective unless, before board proceedings are instituted:
(1) the board gives notice, in a manner consistent with the notice requirements under Section 154.053, to the affected license holder of the facts or conduct alleged to warrant the intended action; and
(2) the license holder is given an opportunity to show compliance with all requirements of law for the retention of the license, at the license holder’s option, either in writing or through personal appearance at an informal meeting with one or more representatives of the board.
(b) If the license holder chooses to personally appear and an informal meeting is held, the board’s staff and the board’s representatives are subject to the ex parte provisions of Chapter 2001, Government Code, with regard to contacts with board members and administrative law judges concerning the case.
§164.005. Initiation of Charges; Formal Complaint
(a) In this section, “formal complaint” means a written statement made by a credible person under oath that is filed and presented by a board representative charging a person with having committed an act that, if proven, could affect the legal rights or privileges of a license holder or other person under the board’s jurisdiction.
This is analogous to a "probable cause affidavit" in criminal law. The fact that the analogy is made might make it feasible to use "the rights of the accused in criminal prosecutions" clause in the US Constitution: to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
(b) Unless otherwise specified, a proceeding under this subtitle or other applicable law and a charge against a license holder may be instituted by an authorized representative of the board.
(c) A charge must be in the form of a written affidavit that: This is what we need, but it is not done! TMB should keep those affidavits on file and make them subject to review by the legislative oversight committees
(1) is filed with the board’s records custodian or assistant records custodian; and I want to see the affidavit and the complaint filed against me which precipitated my license suspension; there wasn't one!
(2) details the nature of the charge as required by this subtitle or other applicable law.
(d) The board president or a designee shall ensure a copy of the charges is served on the respondent or the respondent’s counsel of record.
(e) The president or designee shall notify the State Office of Administrative Hearings of a formal complaint.
(f) A formal complaint must allege with reasonable certainty each specific act relied on by the board to constitute a violation of a specific statute or rule. The formal complaint must be specific enough to:
(1) enable a person of common understanding to know what is meant by the formal complaint; and
(2) give the person who is the subject of the formal complaint notice of each particular act alleged to be a violation of a specific statute or rule.
(g) The board shall adopt rules to promote discovery by each party to a contested case.
§164.006. Service of Notice
(a) Service of process to notify the respondent of a hearing about the charges against the person must be served in accordance with Chapter 2001, Government Code.
(b) If service described by Subsection (a) is impossible or cannot be effected, the board shall publish once a week for two successive weeks a notice of the hearing in a newspaper published in the county of the last known place of practice in this state of the person, if known.
(c) If the license holder is not currently practicing in this state as evidenced by information in the board files, or if the last county of practice is unknown, the notice shall be published in a newspaper in Travis County.
(d) If publication of notice is used, the date of hearing may not be earlier than the 10th day after the date of the last publication.
§164.007. Administrative Hearings; Confidentiality Issues
(a) The board by rule shall adopt procedures governing formal disposition of a contested case under Chapter 2001, Government Code. A formal hearing shall be conducted by an administrative law judge employed by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. After receiving the administrative law judge’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, the board shall determine the charges on the merits.
(b) Notwithstanding this subtitle or other law, the board may employ, retain, and compensate:
(1) attorneys, consultants, and other professionals as necessary and appropriate to serve as board consultants or special counsel to prosecute complaints filed with the board on behalf of the hearings division and investigating division; and
(2) court reporters and other staff necessary to prepare for or represent the board in the hearings authorized by this section.
(c) Each complaint, adverse report, investigation file, other investigation report, and other investigative information in the possession of or received or gathered by the board or its employees or agents relating to a license holder, an application for license, or a criminal investigation or proceeding is privileged and confidential and is not subject to discovery, subpoena, or other means of legal compulsion for release to anyone other than the board or its employees or agents involved in discipline of a license holder. For purposes of this subsection, investigative information includes information relating to the identity of, and a report made by, a physician performing or supervising compliance monitoring for the board.
(d) Not later than the 30th day after the date of receipt of a written request from a license holder who is the subject of a formal complaint initiated and filed under Section 164.005 or from the license holder’s counsel of record, and subject to any other privilege or restriction set forth by rule, statute, or legal precedent, and unless good cause is shown for delay, the board shall provide the license holder with access to all information in its possession that the board intends to offer into evidence in presenting its case in chief at the contested hearing on the complaint. The board is not required to provide:
(1) a board investigative report or memorandum;
(2) the identity of a nontestifying complainant; or
(3) attorney-client communications, attorney work product, or other materials covered by a privilege recognized by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure or the Texas Rules of Evidence.
(e) Furnishing information under Subsection (d) does not constitute a waiver of privilege or confidentiality under this subtitle or other applicable law.
(f) Investigative information in the possession of the board or an employee or agent relating to discipline of a license holder may be disclosed to:
(1) the appropriate licensing authority of:
(A) another state; or
(B) a territory or country in which the license holder is licensed or has applied for a license; or
(2) a medical peer review committee reviewing an application for privileges or the qualifications of the license holder with respect to retaining privileges.
(g) If investigative information in the possession of the board or its employees or agents indicates that a crime may have been committed, the board shall report the information to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
(h) The board shall cooperate with and assist a law enforcement agency conducting a criminal investigation of a license holder by providing information that is relevant to the criminal investigation to the investigating agency. Information disclosed by the board to an investigative agency remains confidential and may not be disclosed by the investigating agency except as necessary to further the investigation.
§164.008. Right to Counsel
In a hearing involving a disciplinary action under this subtitle, the respondent is entitled to appear personally, by counsel, or both.
§164.009. Judicial Review
A person whose license to practice medicine has been revoked or who is subject to other disciplinary action by the board may appeal to a Travis County district court not later than the 30th day after the date the board decision is final.
Texas Government Code
§ 2001.054. LICENSES.
(a) The provisions of this chapter concerning contested cases apply to the grant, denial, or renewal of a license that is required to be preceded by notice and opportunity for hearing.
(b) If a license holder makes timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a license or for a new license for an activity of a continuing nature, the existing license does not expire until the application has been finally determined by the state agency. If the application is denied or the terms of the new license are limited, the existing license does not expire until the last day for seeking review of the agency order or a later date fixed by order of the reviewing court.
(c) A revocation, suspension, annulment, or withdrawal of a license is not effective unless, before institution of state agency proceedings:
(1) the agency gives notice by personal service or by registered or certified mail to the license holder of facts or conduct alleged to warrant the intended action; and
(2) the license holder is given an opportunity to show compliance with all requirements of law for the retention of the license.
(d) A license described in Subsection (a) remains valid unless it expires without timely application for renewal, is amended, revoked, suspended, annulled, or withdrawn, or the denial of a renewal application becomes final. The term or duration of a license described in Subsection (a) is tolled during the period the license is subjected to judicial review. However, the term or duration of a license is not tolled if, during judicial review, the licensee engages in the activity for which the license was issued.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Doctors speak out on health care reform
1. Give all Americans the same tax credits for purchasing health insurance that businesses have.
2. Make health insurance portable across state lines without any surcharge.
3. Subject health insurance to the same antitrust laws as everyone else, ie., eliminate McCarran-Ferguson
4. Cap non-economic damages or some other equitable tort reform.
5. A whistleblower makes public what is wrong. Listen to us and protect us from retaliation
6. Unleash the free market to find ways to reform health care. Government-run healthcare is not the solution; US and state (Texas) government competes with private business. The Texas Medical Board gives preferences in licensing to doctors who will take government-run healthcare. That's why we have an influx of Muslim doctors, for example. When it was time to get the swine flu vaccine, the government-run health department got the vaccine, but I, as a private solo family physician, couldn't get any.
Texas Phoenix
2. Make health insurance portable across state lines without any surcharge.
3. Subject health insurance to the same antitrust laws as everyone else, ie., eliminate McCarran-Ferguson
4. Cap non-economic damages or some other equitable tort reform.
5. A whistleblower makes public what is wrong. Listen to us and protect us from retaliation
6. Unleash the free market to find ways to reform health care. Government-run healthcare is not the solution; US and state (Texas) government competes with private business. The Texas Medical Board gives preferences in licensing to doctors who will take government-run healthcare. That's why we have an influx of Muslim doctors, for example. When it was time to get the swine flu vaccine, the government-run health department got the vaccine, but I, as a private solo family physician, couldn't get any.
Texas Phoenix
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
