The overzealous Texas Board of Medicine

Some are saying that the Board is going too far in disciplining doctors and listening to anonymous complaints:

One by one, angry, frustrated doctors from Houston to Laredo took the microphone at a legislative hearing in Austin, spilling woeful tales of overzealous oversight “” grueling, expensive probes, witch hunts, railroading “” allegedly committ

(via Every Patient’s Advocate)

Comments

Anonymous
I am very grateful that the Texas Board of Medical Examiners has shown that it has teeth and will take action. This is the best interest of the public as well as honest and ethical physicians. I have no desire to practice with substance abusers, deceitful marketeers, thieves, drug pushers, or hacks. Thank you TSBME.
Throckmorton
Hopefully the Texas Bar will follow the lead
Anonymous
You mean you guys just wanted liability protection without any way to hold you accountable?
Anonymous
Yeah just like the Texas bar anon 1:59
Payne Hertz
“You mean you guys just wanted liability protection without any way to hold you accountable?”
Now, that would be overzealous.
Anonymous
Most are missing the heart of the matter. Annonymous complaints are worth very little. We as a society have internalized and lived by an ethos embodied in the constitution – that one should be able to hear the charges, examine the evidence and cross examine witnesses.
While in the interest of public protection a state board should discretely investigate a pattern of annonymous complaints, it should not ever reach any conclusions based on the annonymous complaints. Conclusions must be based only on verifiable facts that can be tested and challenged in an open forum.
The board could more readily utilize confidential complaints, in which it knows the complaintant’s identity, but keeps it hidden during early probing. If the compliant is to be used as evidence, then the complaintant must agree to what society considers general rules of fairness, that the complaintant’s veracity be open to question and interpretation in an open forum; to have the accused be permitted to face their accusor. This is the only way for any justice to be meeted out. The protections keeping us from suffering inquisitions such as the Spanish ran or in the Star Chamber are prevented by only these few rules of evidence.
Anonymous
I would take whatever is on that website with a big grain of salt. The blog owner can’t stand docs. I pointed out to Trisha Torrey (who runs that weblog) that a “misdiagnosis” of inflammatory breast cancer on a patient was over the course of six weeks not one year as she published. She hasn’t changed the her blog. Guess six weeks doesn’t sound as sensationalist enough.
Anonymous
Example
From the Patient Advocate website:
“…she’s transitioning through treatment for it now, but most certainly, a year’s worth of IBC missed diagnoses have shortened her life”
From the original article:
“She carried that terror for six more weeks, while an internist, two obstetrician-gynecologists, a radiologist, a breast surgeon and an infectious disease specialist all got it wrong, treating her over and over for an infection she didn’t have, despite symptoms that only worsened.”
and from the article:
“Greer’s biopsy, done at University Physicians Healthcare Hospital at Kino Campus, came back negative. But at least one physician who has treated her since then told her there is clear evidence of cancer on the biopsy. A biopsy at Mayo confirmed inflammatory breast cancer”
So just how do these doctors make the diagnosis of IBC in the setting of a negative biopsy (though possibly read wrong by path). Just how does the patient advocate turn six weeks into one year? Why hasn’t the patient advocate bothered to update her website even though she has been told her initial blog was incorrect? Claiming to be a “patient advoacte” does not give you license to play with the facts.

The overzealous Texas Board of Medicine

Related Stories

More in Uncategorized

Comments

Site

Channels

Subscribe

Related Stories

More in Uncategorized

Comments

Site

Channels