Fall 2013
Volume 2, Issue 4


SEXUAL MISCONDUCT LEADS TO LICENSE SUSPENSION The Board found physician engaged in professional misconduct governing the practice of medicine, more specifically sexual misconduct. Board ordered and physician agreed to a three-year license suspension, the first year to be active and the remaining two years served as probation. Physician must continue to participate with the Professional Assistance Program (PAP) and within thirty days prior to his return to practice, provide the Board with a report from PAP detailing his compliance. Upon expiration of the active term of suspension, and until further Order of the Board, physician must have a Board-approved chaperone who is a licensed health care professional who holds a valid license and who must be present anytime he encounters a female patient at any time during the private practice of medicine. Physician to pay a penalty in the amount of $10,000.00 and pay costs in the amount of $2,000.00.


UNSANITARY OFFICE CONDITIONS; FALSE RECORD; FALSE STATEMENT The Board received information that the medical office owned and operated by physician was operated in an unsanitary and unsafe manner, a condition that had been the subject of prior discipline against the physician. The Board also received information regarding physician’s care, treatment and prescribing for a patient. After reviewing the entire record, the Board found that the facts established a basis for disciplinary action in that the physician engaged in the employment of dishonesty, fraud, deception, misrepresentation, false promise or false pretense and professional misconduct. The Board ordered and the physician agreed to be reprimanded for failing to maintain his office in a safe and sanitary condition; for falsifying a medical record by including a progress note indicating an examination when an examination had not been performed; and for testifying dishonestly before a Committee of the Board regarding writing a prescription in the name of one patient intended for another patient. Physician’s license was suspended for two years, with six months active suspension. The remaining eighteen months to be stayed and served as probation, with no credit granted toward the active period of suspension required prior to an application for reinstatement for any period during which he is practicing any type of medicine and/or surgery in any other jurisdiction or country. During the active part of his suspension, physician must successfully complete pre-approved courses by the Board on ethics and infection control, pay costs in the amount of $7,000.00 and a penalty in the amount of $5,000.00.

FAILURE TO DISCLOSE FINANCIAL INTEREST Physician allegedly failed to disclose on successive license renewal applications his financial interest in medical device entities. Physician also allegedly failed to disclose the interests to his hospital on an application for new protocol for permission to conduct and serve as the primary investigator for the device’s clinical trial at the hospital. Physician resolved the matter without a formal proceeding, neither admitting nor denying the allegations, but consented and agreed to each and every term of a consent order formally reprimanding him for failing to make the required disclosures. Physician must successfully complete a Board approved course in ethics within nine months of the date of the consent order, and pay a penalty in the amount of $60,000.00 and costs in the amount of $17,500.00.

FAILURE TO TESTIFY TRUTHFULLY The Attorney General sought to vacate a Consent Order previously entered in resolution of a matter that came to the Board’s attention when a malpractice settlement was reported involving the physician. The Attorney General maintained that newly discovered evidence revealed the physician had not testified truthfully before the Board’s Medical Practitioner Review Panel. The State argued that, inasmuch as the Consent Order was premised to a large extent on the Board’s reliance on the physician’s sworn testimony, the misrepresentations alleged were significant, and as the Board should be able to rely on the truthfulness of a licensee’s sworn testimony in a Board proceeding, the Consent Order be set aside and the matter re-opened to permit further investigation to ascertain the full extent of the physician’s misconduct and resolve the matter in a manner commensurate with the facts. The Board found the physician had engaged in material misrepresentation when offering sworn testimony before the Review Panel and granted the State’s motion. The Board ordered the Consent Order vacated to permit additional investigation.

Far too few physicians are aware of the overwhelming weight that would befall them if targeted by the SBME. For SBME Protection go to ThePAP.com.