Dr. Steven Hotze's Weird War Against the Texas Medical Board

Right wing physicians claim the TMB doesn't play fair. Not everyone agrees.

Once Hotze, Rea and sympathetic legislators criticized the medical board, the AAPS knew the gloves had to come off. First, the association needed to find a lawyer who'd be willing to take on the establishment. A lawyer whose ideals aligned with theirs. There was no better choice than Schlafly.

For one thing, his lineage was impeccable: He's the son of prominent conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly, who in the 1970s fought tooth-and-claw against the proposed Equal Rights Amendment, which stated that "equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged...on account of sex."

Andrew Schlafly is also the founder of Conservapedia, Wikipedia's bizarro twin, which tells us, among other things, that a key tenet of the Homosexual Agenda is preventing five-year-old gay kids from "attending therapy to repair their sexual preference." (Note: Per Conservapedia, if a five-year-old boy is gay, there's a strong chance that either he devotes too much time to figure skating instead of baseball or he hates his dad.)

Dr. Roberta Kalafut spent six years defending her integrity, as well as the Texas Medical Board's.
Courtesy of Roberta Kalafut
Dr. Roberta Kalafut spent six years defending her integrity, as well as the Texas Medical Board's.
Steven Hotze believes he's on the right path to health and happiness for everyone.
Steven Hotze believes he's on the right path to health and happiness for everyone.

The lawsuit was filed against the medical board as a whole and its 19 members individually; however, all the individual claims except Kalafut's were dropped. The association accused her of cooking up frivolous complaints and using her position to circumvent the review process in order to sink her competition. The suit also accused Kalafut's physician husband, Dr. Ed Brandecker, of aiding in the conspiracy.

The AAPS chose Abilene physician Dan Munton as its star witness against Kalafut. Now the head of a successful Abilene sports medicine practice, Munton was once partners with Kalafut and her husband. He had left the practice in 2002, spent two years in St. Louis and, upon returning, received his first confidential complaint. He figured Kalafut had to be behind it. Even after Kalafut and her husband waived their confidentiality, proving they did not file the complaint, Munton and the association pressed on.

"To say I was lonely and sad is an understatement," Kalafut wrote to us. "No one was out there defending me...There appeared to be a feeding frenzy at my expense, fueled locally by my ex-partner and others, and statewide by" Hotze and the association.
_____________________

The smear campaign and nasty emails continued. One morning, Brandecker opened the clinic's email in-box and read a message from "Grim Reaper": "Dear Dr. Faggot Brandecker, Do you really think it's a good idea to publicly advertise your location and where you can be found after what you and that bitch whore of a wife of yours has done to destroy people's lives??"

By this time, Kalafut says, she was already rattled after the 2007 Christmas card threat. She tells the Press by email that she was "assigned a deputy from [the] DPS criminal investigation unit."

"I and my husband were advised to obtain a concealed handgun permit. I was instructed to park in a different location every day and to always look over my shoulder when alone outside."

These were, Kalafut would later say, "very, very lonely years."

The smear campaign against the medical board and Kalafut had a high-profile driver in Hotze, whose prolific PAC newsletter rants and radio-show tirades predicted how the lawsuit would bring an end to the board as Texans knew it. But he had help from a fleet of physicians who felt they were wronged and were eager to support Hotze's crusade.

One of the more vocal supporters was Victoria family physician Shirley Pigott, whom Hotze invited on his radio show to explain how she had been targeted by a former board member after she exposed what she believed was a serious conflict of ­interest.

Pigott had first caught the medical board's attention in 2005, when the board responded to a complaint over a minor record-keeping matter. Pigott entered into an agreed order with the board, under the terms of which she would obtain ten hours of continuing medical education within one year, and she was fined a $500 administrative penalty.

But Pigott soon suspected that at least one board member was conspiring against her. She believed she was being followed and harassed. This feeling came to a head in September 2007, when she was pulled over for speeding on U.S. 59 between El Campo and Wharton.

Pigott would later argue that it was late at night and that she suffered from a mental condition that made her falsely perceive certain situations as threatening. She would also write on numerous blogs that she could not be certain the DPS officer who pulled her over was not actually a rapist in disguise. Or possibly just a goon dispatched by the board. Ultimately, Pigott fled from the officer who pulled her over and a detective who had later come to the scene.

According to court records, and Pigott herself, when the DPS trooper attempted to smash her window with his flashlight, Pigott gunned her Prius, narrowly avoided an oncoming 18-wheeler, and drove at speeds exceeding 100 mph for 93 seconds. Pigott was charged with two felony counts of evading arrest with a motor vehicle, as well as felony assault of a peace officer.

Four months later, Pigott's husband, a Victoria College chemistry professor, was found dead in a trash bin behind Pigott's clinic. A justice of the peace would rule his death a suicide via overdose of Prozac and Ambien. (Citing health reasons, Pigott declined to comment for this story.)

« Previous Page
 |
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
All
 
Next Page »
 
My Voice Nation Help
62 comments
TexDoc
TexDoc

I have one more thing to say about all this:  It is my understanding that Dr. Kalafut's husband did allegedly or by his own admission-(according to this article) file an anonymous complaint against a "Radiologist...200 miles away-[-from the husbands' practice in Abilene] reportedly because the Radiologist failed to report extensive vertebral  metastases in a 33 y.o. who was in severe pain and died a few months later--leaving three children,etc "  Why was an anonymous complaint to the board necessary or helpful?  Osseous mets are surprisingly similar to other vertebral pathology--esp in young people  and not necessarily well defined by peripheral imaging exams.  Why not  just call the Radiologist and ask him to review the case?  I did get the impression from Dr. K and B's former partner-Dr. Munson's letter to Gov Perry,( which is part of the public record-like it or not- )that anonymous complaint filing against fellow physicians in Abilene was (is?) more common than bullets at the gunfight at the OK Corral.

So other than a waste of taxpayer money on a strange code of conduct and misapplied ethics,why single out a Radiologist for torment?  Could it be that unlike the PCP or a surgeon, the hapless Radiologist was expendable because he wouldn't be referring to a pain mgt practice?  The complaint also reveals to me the poor grasp of medical practice and disease patterns  by the complainant--i.e. by the time someone has vertebral mets they are in advanced stages of disseminated neoplasia and probably would only live for a few months anyway.(So it is unlikely-unless there is a pattern of misdiagnosis that the public was endangered)  A physician should know this!


Finally it is very bad to be on record as flying off the handle and cursing at folks like Gov. Rick Perry's aide in public at legislative hearings.  Grocery store altercations are also ill advised in terms of decorum.  As for "being advised to obtain a gun conceal and carry permit for protection", I would think that a gun in the hands of someone who is documented to be  temperamental is a bad choice.

TexDoc
TexDoc

Many facets of this article are illogical.  Dr. Kalafut was appointed to the board in 2002 and tort reform was enacted in 2003, I believe.  I have heard  the recent  revisionist  history that  that the medical board was reportedly" more activist" due to tort reform--- but why-- and to what effect ?  The DMN ran an expose in 2002  about a couple of spine surgeons who were cocaine addicts.  Hmmm OK... Did the board increase its scrutiny of spine surgeons or physician addicts?-apparently not.  To this day, well connected surgeons+/- addictions seem to literally get away with murder--Take the 2013-2014 Baylor hospital Neurosurgeon Dr. Duntsch case, for example, where the Drs'. fellow physicians implored hospital administrators and the Texas Medical Board to look at this guy before he killed or maimed more folks--no anonymous crank complaints here.  For several months there was zero response from TMB in Austin.  Sounds like Dr. Kalafut spent her time on the board targeting easier prey like homeopathic physicians.  I guess from the ugly cartoon prefacing your blog  that Dr. Hotze is your punching bag ---but has he hurt or killed anyone?  Killer surgeons are seldom reined in by the board because they make tons of money for hospitals and are usually insulated by a large group or institution.  It would take some guts to confront them---Dr. Rea, not so much.  Dr. Kalafut, who according to your article did not like to be crossed-- and cursed out Perry's aide at a legislative hearing according to you, has a heck of a nerve to present herself as a volunteer public servant.  Has she acquired any paying positions as a result of her serviice, I wonder.......  Since your portrayal of the lady shows two faces--I would say that she will need a good deal of luck to rehabilitate her reputation, especially as the harder one looks the more fishy things seem, in this case--in my opinion....

animas
animas

The 80 thousand dollars referenced above is about what it takes for the average physician to defend himself against a typical board complaint in Texas.  Any crank can make a complaint and a physician is considered guilty for several years before establishing innocence.It is an ordeal without parallel.  The opinions I express regarding Dr. Kalafut are my own and the reader should investigate other sources before coming to any firm conclusion regarding her or her tenure. .Legilator Bill Zedler (R) Mansfield has been a physician advocate and has knowledge of TMB activities during this (Kalafut's) era.  The TMB in my opinion remains lacking in clear headed and unbiased leadership.    It would be better if  TMB appointments were apolitical.  It is incredulous to presume that DR. K was a "victim" of a right wing conspiracy when  she was appointed by one of our nation's most right wing Governors, for example...

animas
animas

Wow! Boo Hoo regarding "Dr." Roberta Kalafut DO.  You are aware that she "embellished" her training credentials claiming affiliation with Johns Hopkins when actually she was a trainee at a local private Baltimore hospital.  Her physician husband filed "anonymous " complaints against former co-workers and competitors in her small town while she was President of the Medical Board.  And during a hearing with the state legislature she refused to answer questions regarding some of these activities prompted by the board attorney (who also is a shady character in my opinion), but admitted to the anonymous complaint jihad against innocent physicians.  She is a pariah, socio-path and total con artist.  She should be in jail in my humble opinion.

brett190
brett190

Related commentary at KevinMd

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/05/health-care-industrial-complex-stronger-ever.html#



There are numerous additional examples of the unethical conduct of the Missouri Medical Board. If you don't believe me, challenge any ONE of my claims, and we can discuss it at length. Don't write that I am a nut, who is delusional. Yes, I have insight into how I appear, and I ask if you have the ability to unbias yourself against such heresy and ask if what I am saying is true about peer-review. 




Instead of paying attention to the patients harmed by the UMKC Pathology Chair and Program Director, The Missouri Board of Registration for the Healing Arts wrote that "I refused to learn." They did this without a single example or description. If the Medical Board claims that they are protecting patients by granting absolute immunity to peer-review then, we should ask what is important. 


1. A vague, incompetently documented claim that the "resident refused to learn."


2. The Pathology Chair Harming a patient, and not informing them, along with possibly* killing patients from inaccurate blood cultures and wrong antibiotics administered over several months. 


Supposedly I refused to learn. but my annual test score was at the 80th percentile of my peers. Nonetheless, the UMKC Pathology Chair and Program director wrote that I had a "diminished capability in my studies," and that I "refused to learn," each without example. Instead of the medical board recognizing these huge red flags that are discordant with nationally validated tests, and that her documentation is incompetent, aka, non-existent, the medical board reprimanded me for this. 


Why should they not, they can do whatever they want without a care in the world. So long as they look like they are doing a good job to the public. Well, I think that putting academic title before patient safety is not good, and I wish more persons would speak out against corruption in the system, not maintain the status quo. Outcome-based monitoring, not vague incompetent documentation are what medical regulation needs. Thank you for sharing the particular aspect of unethical abuse of discretion that affects those at your level of training. 



Kindest regards Dr. Wes.



---

brett190
brett190

Please consider the Snarky comments. Many people like the UMKC Pathology Chair care more about respect, and authority than patient care. Hundreds of patients at the Truman Medical Center Lakewood Hospital probably did not receive appropriate antibiotics in March - April 2011. The Pathology Chair and Program Director ignored that there was no temperature report from the blood culture incubator for several months. 

To verify this, submit a FOIA request to The Joint Commission.


Also The Pathology Chair and Program Director of Truman Medical Center caused a patient to get their neck cut open and to receive an unnecessary neck dissection on June 22, 2010. 



The Surgical Case Number was S-10-3342 ; The Frozen Section Diagnosis was "Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (Malignant). 
The Final Diagnosis was "Pleomorphic adenoma (benign mixed tumor). 
The OutCome was:   Unnecessary Neck Dissection, levels 2-4
It was not a tough diagnosis. The Dental pathologists said it was just a regular pleomorphic adenoma. There was nothing suspicious about it. 
What is more, the UMKC Pathology Chair and Program Director did NOT tell the patient that her misdiagnosis caused the patient to get their neck cut open.  In addition, the Pathology Chair at UMKC, did NOT inform the patient safety network about the unnecessary surgery that she caused. 

This is just the tip of the iceburg of unethical conduct in the UMKC Pathology Department that I endured for 307 days before going public.

brett190
brett190

brettmd  a month ago

Dear Dr. Craig,

First, I agree with your non-judgemental assessment of the patient.

Next, you are remarkably cynical.

When a physician is talking with a patient and they say that they do not believe the patient, the first thing that goes through many of their minds, is, "how dare they." In reality, one may posit that we actually have too few malpractice cases given the nature of some physicians who make claims such as "I don't believe you."

I witnessed a physician telling a patient that once. The physician called the patient a liar, and I can imagine the first thing that went through the patient's mind was to sue that lying, ignorant doctor.

First, not only did the physician not review the documents that were available to her through the hospital, but second she was unable to cite a single peer-reviewed article supporting her assessment. The patient asked her to cite an article, and she said "I am an expert."

ABMS certificate only makes you a legal expert, not a medical expert on the subject. If one cannot cite a single peer-reviewed article when contested by a patient, have not presented at international conferences on the subject, and have not published at least one article in a peer-reviewed journal indexed by PubMed on the subject, then they probably are a rather inaccurate expert.

Skepticism is important. However, the presumption of dishonesty warrants malpractice lawsuits v physicians.

In summary, if the doctor calls the patient a liar, or says your lying to me without reviewing all of the documents, or citing any peer-reviewed articles, then they deserved to be sued or the relationship terminated due to their paternalistic mistreatment of the patient.

Patients have rights, and paternalistic physicians who assume that the patient is lying appear rather unempathetic.

Kind regards, 
Brett@drsocial.org
http://drsocial.org

  • Guest  brettmd  a month ago

    Does he assume any individual patient is lying, or only that lying is common and he still does his best to help?

    I'd actually rather have a doctor tell me my story sounds fishy and give me the opportunity to prove it or explain better, than the alternative. In which a doctor gives me a rope to hang myself with while they watch with jadedness and Schadenfreude. Because it's really easy for patients to hang themselves even when they're telling the truth. Physicians can ensure that happens with their leading questions, constant interruptions, and rapid-fire interrogation style.

    I'd agree with you to a point, until you use the 'm' word in relation to a particular doctor without knowing the whole story.

  • 5  Suzi Q 38  brettmd • 23 days ago
  • We don't sue over such in the state of California.

    We have tort law, and a judge would throw out such a lawsuit.
    Furthermore, a patient may have difficulty finding a lawyer who would take h/her malpractice case on a contingency basis.

    All bets are off if the patient is wealthy....and some are.

    My brother, for instance, was so angry at his physician that he sued him for malpractice and did not care how much it cost him.
    He was THAT angry. I think he spent about $50K, and later dropped the case once he made the physician miserable.
    He makes in the high 6 figures a year, so $50K was OK by him.
    Had he taken it to trial, the costs would have at least doubled.

    I could think of better things to do with that kind of money.

    Some doctors are smug in California, feeling secure about tort law, etc. That is O.K. except if you call someone who has a huge ego and temper like my brother a "liar," then you are asking to get sued, IMHO.
    I would not sue as I am not wealthy. I would just do everything in my power short of suing to report the physicians actions.

    I would prove that I wasn't a liar and then call the patient advocate. I would also do the patient-physician "break-up."

    At least get h/her a reprimand.
    Post it on YELP, and on other sites that evaluate physicians.

    Post: "This doctor had the audacity and arrogance to call me a "liar."" I do not recommend h/her."

  • ubtfulGuest  brettmd  23 days ago

    Whoops, you were addressing the author of this post, not Dr. Caley...one of these days my brain will work better.

brett190
brett190

    • brettmd  Mengles  5 days ago


      It is equated as a form of expertise. However, if you look at the peer-reviewed literature written by physicians with Board certification in many different fields, it is not always equivalent with quality. Furthermore, the standard of knowledge, or understanding of pathophysiology is not always accurate. Thus, what the specialty board certification asks may be inaccurate.

      Board certification is established by organizations who are leaders in the field and attempts to verify that the trainee has knowledge and skills that are competent in what is currently known. It does NOT verify that the trainee will help discover what is known or advance the field.

      I did not complete residency program at the UMKC Pathology Department and I was dismissed for, the number one thing listed by the GME Committee, was, "Lack of energy."

      Remarkable that such a vague, non-descript statement would pass muster in an academic medical center. Consider what is the difference between an assessment of an intrinsic quality of a person, such as their energy level, and their conduct. The person lacked “energy,” or the person was walking at a rate of one-step per minute, catatonic, shaking; or the resident was unable to jump when asked. Incompetent documentation by someone with authority, including that of this symptom, and not a sign, “energy,” is not quality documentation. Thus from a legal perspective, you are correct, board certification is always a form of expertise. However, the question that physicians and medical doctors must ask, should all board certification, in all specialties, by all persons, in spite of not distinguishing between a sign and a symptom be considered so. Currently it is, but as you can see, some states are keener on the quality discrepancy. For example, in New York, pathologists are not allowed to talk to patients about the lab tests. Perhaps this is because pathologists have no training and one or more pathology “leaders,” are incompetent to document a routine clinical observation.

      Instead of claiming that I did not complete my work on time, which the chair did (without a single example), claiming I did not pay attention to detail, which the chair did (again, without a single example during my entire third year, despite her writing it multiple times that year), and then stating that these occurred repeatedly are a few of the reasons that I did not complete residency training at the UMKC Pathology Department. I have no shame in being dismissed from the Program.

      Would you feel shame in being dismissed from a residency program for a "lack of understanding," if you had satisfactory board (USMLE exam scores), completed the USMLE Step 2 CS unlike the Pathology Chair, had several peer reviewed publications in prestigious medical journals, your abstract was accepted to a world congress, and your abstract was accepted for oral presentation at the world congress. The residency program suggested I lack understanding, but according to a Harvard trained dermatologist (dermatology is much more competitive than pathology), (Harvard is a top tier school, UMKC is respectable), and according to a world congress, it is not I who lack understanding.

      What some call expertise, may be better defined as "eminence based medicine that is occasionally, or in some cases, often inaccurate."

      I regret that the pathology chair and residency program documented that I have a lack of understanding, without listing any specific examples. Nonetheless, peer-reviewed publications, and presentation at a world congress do question the quality of some physicians with "Board," certification, at least in one specialty.

brett190
brett190

Here are more comments about the Missouri Medical Board and the UMKC Pathology Department at Google Plus.


https://plus.url.google.com/url?sa=z&n=1401495278442&url=https%3A%2F%2Fplus.google.com%2Fphotos%2F105479712798762608629%2Falbums%2F6014819654644261537%2F6014819655704367154&usg=kVb2478s3ZHoTkQrjsr6oE6f4qw


Please feel free to publicly challenge any of my claims. I was never permitted ot cross-examine anything in peer-review. The American Medical Association, code of medical ethics, states that such conduct is unethical. Thus every single disciplinary action taken against me was not only NOT in compliance with the Universities policies and procedures, The Pathology Chair's communication skills and documentation were routinely incompetent and ineffective. In addition, The pathology Chair harmed patients repeatedly . 



Brett Snodgrass May 21, 2014


Racism exists in those who maliciously accuse others of racism. Consider one who ignores patient harm, selective seizes on a discrepancy of Fitzpatrick skin types between two individuals who have an important conflict regarding proper care of patient specimens.  #Patient #care   #PtSafety   #VA   #VAScandal  There is no VA Scandal, that is the norm for medical education at some institutions. President Obama, you said that none of us should tolerate such conduct. Yet the #SaveGME  movement does not self-regulate in any reasonable manner. Unless of course, you consider letting impaired residents provide patient care. According to at least one academic medical center in the United States, and their medical board, Impaired resident physicians may provide patient care. In contrast to the American Medical Association Code of Ethics, the State Medical Board and the University think that nothing should be done to intervene to help the impaired physician or the patients that the physician is potentially harming. 




Greg S.May 22, 2014+5

+Brett Snodgrass 

> Racism exists in those who maliciously accuse others of racism.


Not exactly a winning start there, sport. 





Brett SnodgrassMay 22, 2014

+Greg S. Dear Greg, I was accused of racism by someone with a very suspicious, untrustusting, and unhealthy thought process. 


The type of person who, upon finding someone that challenges their claim, solicits several defamatory letters; a gossip who spreads rumors, about employees, and a physician who has somehow convinced the State Medical Board that "refusing to learn," is compatible with being an international academic speaker, author of several articles, and a recipient of other awards.


Racism was a huge problem of unfathomable evil, oppression, and perversion of justice. 


I am fortunate that I have seen little racism in my time. However, there are some, such as the aformentioned physician who malignantly slander subordinates with accusations of racism. This is likely a projection of physician's own racism as none of the alleged evidences of racism stand to cross-examination.

Kind regards.

-Brett





Brett SnodgrassMay 22, 2014

+Judith Church

Dear Judith, Chapter nine of the AMA Code of Medical ethics addresses the standards of professional conduct. 

Kind regards,

-Brett




Glenn RaiderMay 22, 2014+2

+Greg S. And Snodgrass is an Doctor? Wow.






Greg S.May 22, 2014

Glenn Raider He seems pretty legit that way.  Scary to think that that other stuff is lurking just under the surface!


Glenn RaiderMay 22, 2014+2

You are right, Greg. I'm not doubting his credentials, just wouldn't have my family as his patients.



Brett SnodgrassMay 22, 2014

+Glenn Raider +Greg S.

Dear Gentlemen, 

Is it unprofessional or unethical if I speak up for my patients, if I think it unethical for the pathology chair to do nothing about inappropriate care of patient's breast tumors, if I think it unethical for the pathology chair to cause a patient to get their neck cut open on June 22, 2010 by misdiagnosing a benign tumor as malignant, for the chair to refuse to do anything about an absence of microbiology temperature monitoring for more than a month. To me, gentlemen, , hundreds of patients potentially given wrong antibiotics in Spring 2011 is not good. 

I understand that most physicians tacitly collude with unethical conduct so that they may be deemed professional and promoted. 

Projection is a well-described defense mechanism. 

If I may ask; please consider and let me know what you would do, if you were me?

Should I lie and say that the Chair did not harm patients and lie repeatedly. I would appear professional, yet if you looked carefully, unethical conduct was carried out in nearly every evaluation that the chair reported.

Thank you,

-Brett

Judith ChurchMay 22, 2014

Don't you guys go to bed? +Greg S. +Glenn Raider


Greg S.May 22, 2014

+Judith Church Insomnia is a harsh taskmaster :/


Judith ChurchMay 22, 2014

I think Dr. Snodgrass is okay. He provides a service that is well needed. +Greg S. +Glenn Raider

Greg insomnia is not healthy. You require 8 hours. 



Greg S.May 22, 2014

+Judith Church His service is one thing, but his reverse-racism idea is rather another :/

Judith ChurchMay 22, 2014

You are referencing the "malicious racism excist in those accusing others of racism". The word there is malicious. 

Judith ChurchMay 22, 2014

+Jamae S. Sippio thank you Jamae I appreciate your good and positive thoughts. God Bless you!



Brett SnodgrassMay 22, 2014

+Greg S.

Dear Greg,

Please permit me to clarify. I am not proposing a reverse racism idea. I am proposing that a person from west-Asia who accuses white people (Fitzpatrick skin type 2) of being racist (not being discriminated against), is a most unpleasant thing to deal with in the workplace. This is in addition to being against the AMA code of medical ethics of being objective and permitting cross-examination. 


racism or reverse racism would be where the person treated another differently because of their physical appearance or race, etc,


What I am describing is a racist person assuming that other people are racist simply because they are probably racist. For example, a dispute between two employees over providing proper patient care should obviously be seen for what it is. In contrast, this pathologist, with no clinical training in North America, has unwisely maligned a person she does not like as being racist. 


Accusing others of being racist may be different than treating others differently because of appearance.


Kind regards,


Brett

brett190
brett190

You decide if the Missouri Medical Board is acting ethically and professionally consistent with the standards of a state agency. Please consider and comment whether the medical board in Missouri is apparently protecting or harming. 


More information on the Medical Board of Missouri at http://drsocial.org and Twitter.


Doctor on Demand, an app for everyone. 

http://drsocial.org/forums/topic/96/doctor-on-demand-an-app-for-ev

Also Google Helpouts has video consults with licensed physicians who can legally write you a prescription. I am not currently a licensed physician. What this means is that I reportedly blamed someone for something. The medical board has no idea what this is, or when it occurred, but that didn't stop them from "protecting," patients by writing it occurred. No evidence of any of those claims, other than hearsay from a physician who lied directly to the medical board and caused patient harm should raise serious questions about whether absolute immunity to the members of medical boards is good. If I were on the medical board I would not write that someone blamed another person, repeatedly, without a single example of blame. 

I would encourage you to support the Federal Trade Commission who may soon hold state medical board members accountable to exercise common sense. For example, if they were going to write that someone refused to learn, they should have at least a single example of when this occurred, how this occurred, why it occurred, and what was done to remedy it. Much of the practice of medicine isn't about patient safety, but about blame, refusal to learn, "saying one thing and doing another," difficulty understanding, underlying problem; each of the aforementioned claims without a single example. 

Can't afford to see a doctor? You may be interested in knowing that by abusing discretion, state medical boards limit the number of physicians who are able to care for the poor who would not otherwise receive care.  The federal government has recognized that this is not good for patients, and the Supreme Court will soon decide a case from North Carolina regarding whether those on Medical Boards can repeatedly exercise incompetent documentation and not be accountable for it. The one who suffers in the end from such administrative negligence, is the poor. Those who are rich can afford many physicians, but there is a shortage of physicians and the power of state medical boards to abuse the poor may soon be restricted by the Supreme Court. Medical Boards contribute to the harm of the poor by administrative negligence that results in a lack of providers to care for patients. Would you let an impaired physician care for patients? Most likely not. Indeed, no competent physician would (1) let this abomination to the practice of medicine, or (2) repeatedly write without evidence, as the medical board has regarding the aforementioned items, (3) nor would a competent entity write that preventing patient harm is bad, whilst (4) the occurrence of repeated acts of patient harm by a senior physician is not significant.

I hope this helps some and that you get better. 

-BrettMD


http://drsocial.org/forums/topic/312/chronic-sinusitis-or-worse-plea

brett190
brett190

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/05/health-care-industrial-complex-stronger-ever.html


Comment to the KevinMD article from myself: 


I encourage everyone who reads this to support the @FTC to break down the monopoly and corruption that results from absolute immunity to abuse the law. If the medical board members had to be held even remotely accountable to the law, they would consider their actions, but I have numerous examples detailing that they do not.Support the @FTC 


If SCOTUS rules that States can violate the anti-trust laws then there is no hope for patient advocacy and we can expect many more VA scenarios.



From Doximity, Frank Proscia, MD Psychiatry@DoctorsCouncil: Warning to all hospitals- do not manipulate statistics! Severe Report Finds V.A. Hid Waiting Lists at Hospitalshttp://dox.im/8pm9ttLike Comment



Doximity comments:

https://www.doximity.com/posts/21885


Dear Dr. Proscia,If you are actually trying to warn hospitals, then I respect that. Yet, psychiatrists are very clever, and ask questions they already know the answer to, etc... In case you are truly earnest in letting other hospitals know that they should not act unethically, here is how *a few* unscrupulous and personality disordered administrators and leaders may respond to your warning."Warn them," that is

a1. Threat (per a pathology chair)

2. Unprofessional

3. Unethical

4. You will likely be reprimanded by a State Medical Board for your unethical and unprofessional conduct that will lead to your dismissal from a hospital. Don't worry, they don't have to behave ethically or competently. They can decide whether you were ethical or not by the flip of a coin and they are completely immune from the consequences of their actions secondary to the Health Care Quality "Improvement," Act of 1986. 


5 More here: 

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1401460#t=comments


Kind regards doctor,I hope you are not serious. Warn someone who has authority over you in medicine. Don't you know that physicians cannot speak up for their patients, for justice, or bring poor care and patient harm to the attention of others. The medical board in missouri continues to call my attorney telling her garbage such as I won't be silent. Perhaps they should take off their prejudicial lenses, and if* they don't, I hope that the FTC will win with SCOTUS and I will take the medical board members to court and sue them for harming patients through administrative negligence, and multiple acts of abuse of discretion.

brett190
brett190

Another Kind of "Doc Fix," A "Doc-Shortage Fix" (from NEJM Article http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1401460#t=comments


Another somewhat related topic in need of a "Doc Fix," -the “Doc Shortage." 

The process of application for medical licensure is in need of fixing, and is contributing to the "Doc Shortage."

Please consider that Frederick L. Greene, MD was the former Chair and Program Director at Carolina’s Medical Center in Charlotte, NC. After working under Dr. Greene for one year, I was mailed a certificate that was signed by

1.Chairman, Board of Commissioners

2.Chair 

3.President

4.Senior Vice President, Education and Research


and the certificate stated:


“This Certifies That

Brett Thomas Snodgrass, M.D.

has faithfully and satisfactorily served in the capacity of

first Year Resident in General Surgery

From July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008”


In spite of this quadruply signed document stating "This Certifies" the Medical Board claimed it does not count.


Are we empowering our peers, physicians, to judge with great partiality and thereby limit the number of physicians? Maybe a “Doc-shortage Fix,” could be found if those on medical boards judged their peers with equity including interstate consultation.


Thank you kindly.

Brett Snodgrass, MD


brett190
brett190

I was reportedly "uncooperative," because I disagreed with staff that guidelines should be followed & tumors should not  sit on the counter becoming necrotic. The emails to the ACGME & DIO detail this. Yet Patient harm was covered up & appropriate care reprimanded. According to the

1986-HCQIA-unaccountable peer-review committee:  it is unethical to report that a Chair is causing patient harm, as on June 22, 2010; and then not reporting the harm to the hospital safety commisssion or informing the patient that their misdiagnosis resulted in an unnecessary neck dissection. Much more concerning is hundreds of patients potentially given wrong antibiotics. Personally, I think patient harm is a huge deal. Yet, according to the unaccountable peer-review committees the following three  items are professional activity that is also ethical:

  1. Causing patient harm is okay, as is not reporting the harm to the patient or hospital safety network.
  2. Hundreds of patients potentially given wrong antibiotics over several months is okay.  
  3. Filing a patient safety report for an *appropriate* bone marrow biopsy: aka the unaccountable peer-review committee agreed with the Chair:  “this doctor gave bad patient care.” … for an INDICATED bone marrow biopsy.

The following activity is unethical according to the presently unaccountable peer-review committees.

  1. Blaming someone, for something, sometime, and doing this repeatedly. No one knows who was blamed, or when, or for what, but the “unaccountable peer-review committee” said that it was unethical & unprofessional conduct to do these “unknown blame actions.”


brett190
brett190

Another Kind of "Doc Fix," A "Doc-Shortage Fix" (from NEJM Article http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1401460#t=comments


Another somewhat related topic in need of a "Doc Fix," -the “Doc Shortage." 

The process of application for medical licensure is in need of fixing, and is contributing to the "Doc Shortage."

Please consider that Frederick L. Greene, MD was the former Chair and Program Director at Carolina’s Medical Center in Charlotte, NC. After working under Dr. Greene for one year, I was mailed a certificate that was signed by

1.Chairman, Board of Commissioners

2.Chair 

3.President

4.Senior Vice President, Education and Research


and the certificate stated:


“This Certifies That

Brett Thomas Snodgrass, M.D.

has faithfully and satisfactorily served in the capacity of

first Year Resident in General Surgery

From July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008”


In spite of this quadruply signed document stating "This Certifies" the Medical Board claimed it does not count.


Are we empowering our peers, physicians, to judge with great partiality and thereby limit the number of physicians? Maybe a “Doc-shortage Fix,” could be found if those on medical boards judged their peers with equity including interstate consultation.


Thank you kindly.

Brett Snodgrass, MD


brett190
brett190


Another Kind of "Doc Fix," A "Doc-Shortage Fix"

Another somewhat related topic in need of a "Doc Fix," -the “Doc Shortage." The process of application for medical licensure is in need of fixing, and is contributing to the "Doc Shortage." Please consider that Frederick L. Greene, MD was the former Chair and Program Director at Carolina’s Medical Center in Charlotte, NC. After working under Dr. Greene for one year, I was mailed a certificate that was signed by 1. Chairman, Board of Commissioners 2. Chair 3. President 4. Senior Vice President, Education and Research and the certificate stated: “This Certifies That Brett Thomas Snodgrass, M.D. has faithfully and satisfactorily served in the capacity of first Year Resident in General Surgery From July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008” In spite of this quadruply signed document stating "This Certifies" the Medical Board claimed it does not count. Are we empowering our peers, physicians, to judge with great partiality and thereby limit the number of physicians? Maybe a “Doc-shortage Fix,” could be found if those on medical boards judged their peers with equity including interstate consultation. Thank you kindly. Brett Snodgrass, MD


http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1401460#t=comments

brett190
brett190

Missing widespread cancer is a problem, a huge problem. Next, a doctor certainly can decide cases outside their specialty, which is good decision making by Dr. Kalafut. I not a cardiologist, but my abstract on heart anatomy has been accepted to a world congress, and if I can afford the plane ticket I will go there to speak.

Next, if you decide that a physician has a drug problem, you should have reasonable evidence supporting that, and then investigate. In my case, I had a multidisciplinary evaluation with the hospital wellness committee that spanned several months for their final conclusion: absolutely NO impairment.

Nonetheless, the medical board ignored the gamut of evidence to the exclusion of one physician who repeatedly harmed patients and maintained incompetent documentation.

Common sense people, "harming patients is very bad," I even gave the case number of unnecessary surgery that the Chair caused to the medical board.

I like that the Texas Medical Board Chair is engaged socially. Recluse persons who refuse to discuss their actions with anyone are probably more likely to be unscrupulous. I tried for 307 days to resolve this privately, then offered the medical board this again.

Consider that I was reprimanded by the pathology chair for a bone marrow biopsy, both in my evaluation, by the DIO in her recent deposition (used the word "maybe, shouldn't have been done) , and the report filed by the chair with the Safety Network states "Dr. Patel states the bone marrow biopsy is indicated."

Next, my original diagnosis was likely correct, although it wasn't determined until the patient was transferred to KU, and specimen was sent to MD Anderson. Regardless, the patient needed a bone marrow biopsy for their lymphoma.

Evidence matters people and it may be prudent to consider that administration probably lies sometimes.

CHAIR MAY (list incomplete, but Board did NOT even read Timeline)!

1. Lie to Board about ability to evaluate Competency

2. Lie that a resident blamed someone

3. Lie that the resident repeated this action of blame

4. Lie that a resident lacks energy

5. Lie that the resident refused to learn

6. Lie about breaking the saw

7. Lie about speaking in a chinese accent (3 & 4 party info)

8. Lied about follow-through on long-term tasks

9. Lied about resident being impaired in the gross room (never said or did anything!)

10. Chair lied about resident “being deceitful of their whereabouts.”

11. Chair lied about resident losing weight

12. Chair lied about resident abusing drugs

13. Chair lied about resident “he seemed to think these enhanced his performance.”

14. Chair lied about resident “not being particularly forthcoming.”

15. Chair lied about how much formalin resident’s were supposed to use.

16. Chair lied about resident committing underhanded activity on 09 24 2010

17. Chair lied about resident lacking attention to detail (no example given).

18. Chair lied about resident not completing cases on time.

19. Chair lied about resident having an inability to study.

20. Chair lied about the resident lacking the ability to work.

21. Chair lied about a Facebook page being Fake

22. Chair lied about resident’s intellectual capacity returning.

23. Chair lied about reminding the resident how they were feeling

24. Chair lied about resident not collaborating well with others

25. Chair lied to the GME committee on 04 21 2011 about providing all AKCIA evaluations (less than 10%).

26. Chair lied that I caused inapprorpiate medical therapy to the Hospital Patient Safety Network.

I.

Should it always be assumed that the department of the Academic Medical Center is

1. Honest,

2. Competent

and that residents, when they disagree with the administration are

1. Dishonest

2. Incompetent or less competent.

Is it professional to write that a resident is "impaired in the gross room," and that the resident is "drifting academically and technically, becoming a risk for patient care," without saying anything related to the resident, or documentation of doing anything other than observation. Furthermore, the resident is informed that they "have not recovered," by formal letter only, and then they repeatedly ask the DIO, yet are repeatedly denied a simple and reasonable answer from the DIO.

II. Should publications in medical journals be one of several signs of competency.

III. Would you let an impaired resident provide patient care, and then go home?

Please challenge ANY of my claims and I will provide you with supplementary information.

Kindest regards, and please remember patients come first.

brett190
brett190

Missing widespread cancer is a problem, a huge problem. Next, a doctor certainly can decide cases outside their specialty, which is good for Kalafut.

Next, if you decide that a physician has a drug problem, you should have reasonable evidence supporting that, and then investigate. In my case, I had a multidisciplinary evaluation with the hospital wellness committee that spanned several months for their final conclusion: absolutely NO impairment.

Nonetheless, the medical board ignored the gamut of evidence to the exclusion of one physician who repeatedly harmed patients and maintained incompetent documentation.

Common sense people, "harming patients is very bad," I even gave the case number of unnecessary surgery to the medical board.

I like that the Texas Medical Board doctor is engaged socially. Recluse persons who refuse to discuss their actions with anyone are probably more likely to be unscrupulous.

I tried for 307 days to resolve this privately, then offered the medical board this again.

Consider that I was reprimanded by the pathology chair for a bone marrow biopsy, both in my evaluation, by the DIO in her recent deposition, and the report states "Dr. PATEL states the bone marrow biopsy is indicated."

Evidence matters people and administration lies sometimes.

CHAIR MAY (list incomplete, but Board did NOT even read Timeline)! Help!

1. Lie to Board about ability to evaluate Competency

2. Lie that a resident blamed someone

3. Lie that the resident repeated this action of blame

4. Lie that a resident lacks energy

5. Lie that the resident refused to learn

6. Lie about breaking the saw

7. Lie about speaking in a chinese accent (3 & 4 party info)

8. Lied about follow-through on long-term tasks

9. Lied about resident being impaired in the gross room (never said or did anything!)

10. Chair lied about resident “being deceitful of their whereabouts.”

11. Chair lied about resident losing weight

12. Chair lied about resident abusing drugs

13. Chair lied about resident “he seemed to think these enhanced his performance.”

14. Chair lied about resident “not being particularly forthcoming.”

15. Chair lied about how much formalin resident’s were supposed to use.

16. Chair lied about resident committing underhanded activity on 09 24 2010

17. Chair lied about resident lacking attention to detail (no example given).

18. Chair lied about resident not completing cases on time.

19. Chair lied about resident having an inability to study.

20. Chair lied about the resident lacking the ability to work.

21. Chair lied about a Facebook page being Fake

22. Chair lied about resident’s intellectual capacity returning.

23. Chair lied about reminding the resident how they were feeling

24. Chair lied about resident not collaborating well with others

25. Chair lied to the GME committee on 04 21 2011 about providing all AKCIA evaluations (less than 10%).

26. Chair lied that I caused inapprorpiate medical therapy to the Hospital Patient Safety Network.

I.

Should it always be assumed that the department of the Academic Medical Center is

1. Honest,

2. Competent

and that residents, when they disagree with the administration are

1. Dishonest

2. Incompetent or less competent.

Is it professional to write that a resident is "impaired in the gross room," and that the resident is "drifting academically and technically, becoming a risk for patient care," without saying anything related to the resident, or documentation of doing anything other than observation. Furthermore, the resident is informed that they "have not recovered," by formal letter only, and then they repeatedly ask the DIO, yet are repeatedly denied a simple and reasonable answer from the DIO.

II. Should publications in medical journals be one of several signs of competency.

III. Would you let an impaired resident provide patient care, and then go home?

Please challenge ANY of my claims and I will provide you with supplementary information.

Kindest regards, and please remember patients come first.

brett190
brett190

The HCQIA of 1986 is in need of reform. If you

Give unlimited authority to a group of people and say do whatever you feel is just, you will not likely always avoid corruption.

I have made comments regarding this in the New England Journal of Medicine. Physicians who stand up for patients get reprimanded. Consider the VA Scandal, doctors in the VA could NOT advocate for their patients or against corrupt administration because they would be reprimanded as I was.

Excuse me, but the medical board should not let well-documented repeated acts of patient harm occur whilst reprimanding the prevention of patient harm.

A group of physicians and administrators in my State Testified against the

State Medical Board in their depositions. The medical board grants licenses to those who molest patients and cause harm, but not to those who disturb the peace and advocate for their patients. Speak up for your patients and for justice, even if the medical board doesn't like it because they put academic title above patient safety.

The Medical Board

Please visit http://drsocial.org for more information on good doctors, medical ethics. Your free SignUp results in $1 donation to medical research.

brett190
brett190

The HCQIA of 1986 is in need of reform. If you

Give unlimited authority to a group of people and say do whatever you feel is just, you will not likely always avoid corruption.

I have made comments regarding this in the New England Journal of Medicine. Physicians who stand up for patients get reprimanded. Consider the VA Scandal, doctors in the VA could NOT advocate for their patients or against corrupt administration because they would be reprimanded as I was.

Excuse me, but the medical board should not let well-documented repeated acts of patient harm occur whilst reprimanding the prevention of patient harm.

brett190
brett190

One medical board has literally ignored repeated acts of patient harm and reprimanded good care.

brett190
brett190

I would say a man in her position and herself are both self-righteous persons who care more about their friends and appearing as patient safety advocates

than actually protecting patients. Medical Board in Missouri is similarly unscrupulous.

CyndeeMalowitz
CyndeeMalowitz

I testified against a pain management physician a couple of years ago at an ISH. The hearings were running several hours behind, so I was asked to sit in a holding room, along with several physicians who had a hearing that day. I'll never forget some of the comments I overheard...it was horrifying. A physician told his attorney that he was "screwed," because Kalufut was presiding over the hearings...he actually called her a bitch. A couple of other physicians were talking and one of them said Dr. Kalufut was known as the "Wicked Witch of the West" and they were all "going down" that day. Now, do you think they would have said that about a man in her position? Of course not! An outspoken and authoritative man is considered strong, but a woman with the same attributes is a bitch (at least in this backward state). I found Dr. Kalufut to be extremely professional during the hearing. She asked relevant questions and she certainly didn't launch into any tirades.

I think it's rather disturbing that these politicians, particularly Dr. Zerwas, have intervened on behalf of their campaign donors. I guess it shouldn't surprise me that bad doctors can pay unethical, unscrupulous, bottom feeding politicians to get their cases dismissed. I see how it works...it's very clear to me now.

It's high time the trial lawyers came back into the picture. The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine. . .

abileneice
abileneice

Okay , I’ve heard enough! 

Dr Kalufut and her husband Dr. Ed. Brandecker are first class folks!!!  Their only fault in this whole ordeal is trusting Gov. Rick Perry.  And coming from a fellow Aggie, that’s hard to say but Perry has screwed more folks than Dr K. (including his own alumni) in his quest for greatness far above his abilities!!!!  

I know Dr K and had the privilege of having dinner with her and Ed during this whole ordeal.  At one of those of those dinners, the Doc who actually filed the complaint against her competitor came to the table and apologized for not coming forward and clearing this whole matter up!  In his own words he said , “ I’m sorry bit I can fall on my sword to save you”.

I have volunteered on numerous occasions to testify to this to discredit Mr. Hotze  (sorry,  I can’t use Dr. in the same phrase with Hotze)  and Doc’s M and D (local pain docs behind all of this in Abilene ) but have been asked not to by Dr Kalufut  to preserve the integrality and  animosity of the Texas Medical board and these two loser advisories who filed complaints against them. 

These two, Hotze and the politicos of Cruz, Patrick, Dewhurts and Perry  could learn volumes in class and ethics from Dr Kalufut and Brandecker !!!!!   

bobby.rubarts
bobby.rubarts

I was proud to represent Dr. Kalafut as her individual attorney in the AAPS' trial in October 2012.  Under extremely trying circumstances, Dr. Kalafut always acted with dignity and honor.  


In my view, Mr.  Malisow fairly summarized the Court's opinion.  Importantly, the Court didn't simply find AAPS' evidence unpersuasive--he specifically found there wasn't any; AAPS had no evidence supporting its claims against Dr. Kalafut:


"The Association maintains that evidence was presented during trial that ‘Kalafut has participated personally in a ‘joint activity with state actors’ (and even been the impetus of many of the constitutional violations) with respect to investigations and complaints manipulated by the [Board].’  However, contrary to the Association’s argument, the court finds lacking any proof that Kalafut has even attempted to exert any influence she may have on the Board regarding any physician complaint.  The court finds what exists is only the Association’s unsubstantiated conjecture and its argument that Kalafut might, somehow, influence unidentified individuals currently on the Board to assist her in committing future, unspecified violations."  


With no evidence to support its claims, AAPS resorted to baseless character attacks.  For example, AAPS 1) implied, with no supporting evidence, that Dr. Kalafut personally took drugs she prescribed for a former employee; 2) questioned Dr. Kalafut about an employee who embezzled money from her practice, erroneously implying this occurrence should have subjected her to discipline by the Texas Medical Board;  and 3) elicited testimony that Dr. Kalafut allegedly yelled at a former employee at a  grocery store. 


In response to AAPS' arguing that Dr. Kalafut's alleged run-ins with her former employee somehow amounted to any proof of its claims against her,  the Judge appeared to ridicule AAPS' argument:


The Court:“Yes.I learned something I didn’t know before, and that is a shouting match in a grocery store is a federal case.That goes on my list now as things I need to look out for when they come.”

 

In the end,  the Court completely rejected AAPS'  gratuitous attacks on Dr. Kalafut and properly found AAPS had no evidence to support its claims.  Nonetheless,  I can imagine how winning the case was not enough to make up for all Dr. Kalafut endured over the past 6 years, both in court and  the blogosphere.  I imagine this is especially true when the uninformed--like hansa6421--decide to offer their two cents.  Sadly, it is no wonder so many good people avoid politics and public service.  

rkalafut
rkalafut

Dear hansa6421 -- your comments have provided these readers with just a small glimpse of the exact type and nature Dr. Hotze, Mr Schlafly and their minions have been posting on me for years.  In fact, I believe you (or one of them) may have sent it to me as well, years ago. It is eerily familiar. (I may have saved it somewhere).  As this article so eloquently highlights, you  don't deal with facts, as this would ruin your mantra, your mission.  So here are the facts to your posting.


FACT:  After a 4 day trial, and the judge allowing Mr Schlafly to put on his bevy of witnesses, (some of the very ones mentioned in this article), the Judge found that the AAPS allegations were based on "conjecture" with no evidence to support any of their claims, and he certainly gave Mr. Schlafly ample time to present his case.


FACT:  the only correct statement you make in your entire posting is that board appointments are political.  However, you stated as fact that my appointment was "through (my) father's connection to Rick Perry".  My father was a Democrat his entire political career in Ohio and ran as a Democrat.  He died before my appointment as president.  I and perhaps these readers would find it hard to imagine a Republican Governor from Texas being influenced by a deceased Democratic judge from Ohio.


FACT:  You state as fact that  I was  "eased out the door by Perry when (I) became an embarrassment".  Obviously, you did not take the time to research this because the truth would detract from your mantra.  I was reappointed to an additional second term as president.  I stayed on 1 year of that term to ensure a smooth transition in leadership at the TMB from the retirement of Dr. Donald Patrick (then 70 years old).  I was asked by the governor's office to continue on the TMB but I declined.  I was offered a less time consuming appointment with the District Review Committee, a 4 year term, which I accepted.  The term ended in 2012.  I was offered a re-appointed for an additional 4 years, which I initially accepted, then later declined.  Hardly an embarrassment if I was continually asked.  Even a year later I was asked to take on the chairmanship of another board, but I declined.  Hansa6421, whomever you are, I have the emails to prove this.  Where is your proof of the embarrassment?


FACT:  My husband did not file an anonymous complaint.  He filed a confidential complaint against a radiologist 200 miles away who missed widespread cancer on an MRI scan in a young man's spine.  A young man who had months of pain and agony who died 3 months later, leaving 3 small children under the age of 10 without a father.  The irony, that you fail to mention, is that the TMB dismissed the case as an isolated error on the radiologist's part.  AAPS uses the term "competitors" very broadly.  They call any physician, regardless of the geographical location, "my competitors".  I am not a radiologist and I don't know and never met this particular physician.


FACT:  You state as fact that "I dictate standards of care in other specialties" that I know "absolutely nothing about".  You obviously haven't taken the time to educate yourself on the legislatively mandated process in place for nearly a decade or longer.  So readers, please forgive me a moment, while I educate hansa6421 on the law.  Once a complaint is filed against a physician, it is reviewed by 2 board certified physicians in that particular specialty.  Those 2 physicians have to agree if there is a violation in the standard of care, if not, it goes to a 3rd specialist in that field until agreement one way or another.  That is the standard that the 19 members of the TMB (physicians and public members) follows.  


Finally, Dr. Hotze is allowed to stand up at a legislative hearing, and in a most unprofessional manner, call the president of the TMB "an ass" and that "my mother should spank me" with no repercussions, no backlash.  On the other hand, when a strong woman as a leader  takes patient protection seriously, she is condemned in the most vicious and vulgar terms with an organized campaign of character assassination .  


Dr Hotze, and hanse 6421, I guess I didn't ask permission of my husband to work outside the home. . .

bc07
bc07

Anyone retaining Schafly as attorney has to be bug**** crazy. Good on your for standing up to these corrupt wackos, Dr. Kalafut. 

Weimarguy
Weimarguy

So called "Dr. Hotze" is a constant guest at fine dining establishments where he guzzles vodka in iced tea. I know because I have served him on many occasions at a famous steakhouse on I-10. He is a total drunk, which would probably explain at least some of his criminal behavior. Not to mention that, if you Hotze watchers notice, he usually is not the one driving. As far as his concern for wellness, HA!

CyndeeMalowitz
CyndeeMalowitz

I would venture to guess that ANY doctor with enough money to fight the medical board is going to either get off completely or get off with a slap on the wrist.

PatientSafetyFirst
PatientSafetyFirst

@Comments: @ It isn't simply the Texas Medical Board. 


We have  

1. Poor & ineffective communication  between 

       1a. Regulatory agencies

         1b. Concerned surgeons.


2. Medical boards are communicating and reviewing evidence as if it was still the 1800's.  Video tape the surgeons if there is significant concern. In case hospitals and regulatory agencies missed it, we can monitor physicians with fitbits and GPS. If grave concerns, why not give the physician the benefit of the doubt and use robust electronic monitoring methods. This will prevent patients from suffering due to a lack of care and reduce false positives. 


3. I support Dr. Kalafut's decision to reprimand the missed spinal mets, pending a review of the x-ray, if she can see the mets as can most physicians, then great. 

3b. I had to teach a night-float radiologist how to measure midline shift on a brain CT. He must not have been used to trauma. 



4. A lack of accountability of medical board members for their decisions. 


5. The AMA is opposing the FTC in antitrust lawsuits, but is that really what is good for patients? 





CyndeeMalowitz
CyndeeMalowitz

Ha! Eighty thousand dollars will buy you a politician who, in turn, will get your case dismissed.

PatientSafetyFirst
PatientSafetyFirst

@animas That is lame, her hospital was probably affiliated, and if so she deserves the Hopkins title. 

animas
animas

@animas I misspoke--I meant to say that there were allegations that Dr. Kalafut's husband filed anonymous complaints about competitors as reflected by a letter penned by one alleged  "victim"  to the Gov.  Also it is NOT documented that she admitted that the complaints were filed by her husband however dismissed the complaints as a trivial matter saying that they had been quickly dismissed--- to my knowledge.  I would suggest checking the record of the legislative hearing...

TexDoc
TexDoc

@animas If the allegations that the husband was a source of complaints neutralizing competitors were unfounded, it simply points out that the board policy of anonymous complaints espoused during Kalafuts presidency was a really terrible policy--boomeranging on her and her husband.  Bad policies do that, a lot.

animas
animas

@animas I DO NOT WISH TO BE TOO HARD ON DOCTOR KALAFUT BUT THE TMB IS AND HAS BEEN A MESS FOR SEVERAL DECADES IN MY HUMBLE OPINION.

BrettMDatDrSocial
BrettMDatDrSocial

@brett190 Failed laboratory equipment isn't the problem. The problem is that it is the Chair's job, and duty to monitor the lab's compliance. No temperature for two months, is a failure of equipment. That is true. However, there is an attempt to distort the situation by claiming I suggested she was responsible for the failure. 


No, I made the claim of wrong antibiotics administration, patient harm, possibly to 100 people, possibly a few people died  because she was negligent in that she ignored there was NO report from microbiology reporting the temperature for two months. 


What is most concerning, is lying to the ACGME claiming they document ischemia time when they routinely did not, nor did they provide proper care. Early death is the potential negative outcome, and this risk occurred over a period of six months, and was "reportedly corrected." on June 9

brett190
brett190

What do the members of the Texas Medical Board think. Should the Medical Board reprimand my reporting of this as unethical?

brett190
brett190

I would say a man in her position and herself are both self-righteous persons who care more about their friends and appearing as patient safety advocates

than actually protecting patients. Medical Board in Missouri is similarly unscrupulous.

CyndeeMalowitz
CyndeeMalowitz

I'm very sorry you had to go through this ordeal. I can't even imagine the stress you endured.

hansa6421
hansa6421

@bc07

Shed no tears for Roberta Kalifut. This woman created her own problems and made many enemies. In Board hearings she behaved like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, alternating between irrational pronouncements, and shouts of “off with their heads.” Self righteous, omnipotent, and sadistic, she bullied, insulted, and threatened other physicians. Although she herself practiced in a narrow field, that didn’t stop her from dictating standards of care in other specialties she knew absolutely nothing about.

Her Board position was purely a political appointment (through her father’s connection to Rick Perry), and was not due to any particular qualifications.

She was finally eased out the door by Perry when she became an embarrassment. There were too many complaints about her conduct and lack of professionalism. The last straw came when she refused to deny under oath that she and her husband had filed an anonymous complaint against a competitor. She was quietly reassigned to a district branch and disappeared from sight.

Dr. Kalifut should not be regarded as a sympathetic figure.

bc07
bc07

@HoustonNative  How is this relevant to the right-wing nutjobs in this article? 

TexDoc
TexDoc

@animas Actually Dr. Kalafut admits that her husband filed an anonymous complaint against a physician in her reply to a commenter below.  Dr. Munton, a former partner of Kalafut and her husband wrote a letter of protest  about his former Abilene partners to Gov Perry outlining a culture of anonymous complaint filing by physicians against physicians in Abilene.  This may reflect the unsophisticated nature of a small community where professional jealousies abound.  My personal feelings are that anonymous complaints designed  to get people in trouble with poorly organized state or other govt regulators are cowardly devices.  This current posturing that "they were only thinking of the public welfare" is delusional BS.  These people are clueless bullies with professional degrees.

CyndeeMalowitz
CyndeeMalowitz

EVERYTHING is a total mess, especially the fact that doctors are getting away with murder and absolutely NOTHING gets done about it. Oh wait...there's a doctor shortage! So, ANY physician is better than none!

BrettMDatDrSocial
BrettMDatDrSocial

Nonetheless the Chair and Program Director lied to the ACGME claiming that there was compliance with the guidelines during January - June 2011.


There was NOT compliance, and it only takes a few hours to review several lumpectomy reports from that time period. I had to argue and have conflict with the gross room attendant in order to provide proper patient care. Other residents simply let the lumpectomy specimens sit on the counter likely becoming necrotic because they didn't want the controversy. Well, if people don't speak up when patients are harmed, and when Department Chair's lie to cover their personal interests, people can go to social media. As you can see, there is a progression

1. Chair

2. Dio 

3. ACGME

4 Board

5. Social Media.


Nothing unprofessional about that sequence of events, but what is concerning is that no one bothered to check even ten lumpectomy reports from that time. There is nothing in there documenting the ischemia time. It would occasionally sit on the counter for a couple to a few hours without formalin before it was logged in. Compare the log-in time with the surgical excision time through a review of the anatomical pathology computer system. 

CyndeeMalowitz
CyndeeMalowitz

hansa6421@bc07 - Let me guess...you're one of the founders of the AAPS. How proud you must be!

craig.malisow
craig.malisow

@hansa6421 @bc07  Hi hansa6421 -- first, I'd like to say kudos to you for having the integrity and courage to disparage another person while hiding behind a screen name. Your strength of character is truly inspirational. (By the way, if you have any citations to support your statements, please feel free to post them or email them to me.)


After six years of trying, the AAPS could not unearth any evidence that Kalafut or the Board as a whole illegally or unethically targeted physicians. That is plainly stated in the federal judge's ruling. By the way, the judge signed his name on that paperwork -- it wasn't like "Judge6421" or anything cool like that. So I believe a federal judge's finding has slightly more weight than some anonymous person dishing out undocumented dirt. Any criticism or challenges are welcome, but is it too much to ask that they be delivered in a professional, adult manner? 


Thanks,

Craig

BrettMDatDrSocial
BrettMDatDrSocial

@CyndeeMalowitz You are always free to pursue litigation. There are many cases where patients have a bad outcome secondary to nothing related to the physician. Patients who are harmed understandably have difficulty making rational judgments towards the one who they feel abused them and cost them everything. It is a normal human response when someone appears to kill, or not save, or to try to destroy the life of another individual through their given authority.


In addition to malpractice claims, 

there is the option of leaving a physician review at sites such as http://drsocial.org


Many physicians cause significant harm by their inaction, refusal to listen to front line workers, and assumption that people are following the guidelines. This is a critical issue when six months of care can result in many people potentially not given appropriate breast cancer treatment. 


What makes it worse. Is that physicians who the Board assume are competent, lie to the regulatory agencies and say, "oh that person just doesn't like me," they are a "liar," we (actually) follow the guidelines and usually have them within formalin within ~35 minutes and we often document the time. So the regulatory agency says "wow," we caught this liar who doesn't like her. It is important to NOT  conflate different reports with acts during a different year.


Then by lying to the regulatory agency at least six months of poor, possibly very harmful patient care is covered up. The patients don't even know and the medical board refuses to investigate. They refuse to even review a few charts to verify that the doctor was lying. It would be foolish to ask to get another in trouble without investigation. Yet instead they said we are not going to investigate. Okay, it isn't that difficult and can be accomplished in a single day. Then either call me a liar, or vindicate me.  


Corruption on medical boards is being reported with an increasing frequency. Patients need to remember  that they have the opportunity to pursue malpractice when medical boards do not listen. 


It isn't helpful to society if a patient who had a bad outcomes gets a surgeon who provided good care removed from providing care to other patients. 


Patient do die from a lack of care, so the malpractice route is very effective. Revoking the doctors license for a one-time error may not be good for future patients. Do you know anyone that has never made a single mistake. Now if a physician makes a single mistake and then reports it, and we study it, and learn to make the situation idiot proof. 


What I mean, is that if we have a system and a culture of safety, and analyze errors, then we can prevent them from happening again. Instead, if medical boards simply go about revoking licenses of every doctor who makes a single error, then other physicians will cover up the patient harm they caused, as is commonly the case in medicine. 


Repeated harm is another thing. Would you rather have a doctor who harmed you, you sued them and they returned to practice and it never happened. or you get the satisfaction of their license being revoked, but other surgeons begin to cover up their errors and more and more patients are harmed, but there is continual lying by unaccountable administration such as at the VA.



Simpsons555
Simpsons555

@CyndeeMalowitz Do you realize that physicians who are in good standing, lie about their errors. We have a culture with no transparency in medicine. We need 

1. More transparency

2. Better communication

3. Collaboration to prevent harm.


Sometimes people assert errors and death due to a physician but it was unrelated. Consider an autopsy which can help. Also, reviewing the details of the case are important. 


Remember there is always litigation against doctors if you think there is harm. I am unaware of any cases that the patient was not able to either work with the doctor or to sue them; except in certain cases where the person felt they were harmed, but the medical evidence was not there to support it. In addition, you can utilize physiican review sites such as http://drsocial.org to share your comments.


Reprimanding  one board member or ten board members isn't going to solve the problem of a lack of accountability both within and without the VA.


Yes, there is a doctor, but we need objective criteria to evaluate the physicians. Incompetent documentation such as "blames others." when in reality it was a detailed explanation of why one was engaging in such conduct. Instead of giving instructions to change, which is what normal physicians would do, some physicians reprimand GOOD medical care. 


Physicians you think might be good, and they may be; do bad things, or don't stop bad things, and this results in harm and deaths.. 



 
Houston Concert Tickets
Loading...