SENATE BUSINESS PROFESSIONS AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
WILL COME TO ORDER. GOOD MORNING
AS WE CONTINUE TO TAKE SOME
PRECAUTIONS TO MANAGE ON GOING
COVER NINETEEN RISKS THE SENATE
CONTINUES TO WELCOME THE PUBLIC
HAS PROVIDED ACCESS TO BOTH IN
PERSON AND TELECONFERENCES
SUPPRESSION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
FOR INDIVIDUALS WISHING TO
PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY THE
PARTICIPANT TOLL FREE NUMBER AND
ACCESS CODE. IS POSTED ON OUR
COMMITTEE WEBSITE IT WILL BE
DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN AND I
WILL ANNOUNCE IT NOW. TODAY'S
PARTICIPANT NUMBER IS EIGHT FOUR
FOUR. TWO NINE ONE SIX THREE SIX
FOUR. AND THE ACCESS CODE IS.
ONE FOUR ONE ONE ONE FOUR ZERO.
FOR DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW
THE TELECONFERENCES TO WORKS
PLEASE REFER TO. THE SENATE OR
OUR COMMITTEE WEBSITE. I WILL
MAKE MAINTAIN DECORUM DURING THE
HEARING AS IS CUSTOMARY IN ANY
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS DISRUPTIVE MAY
BE REMOVED FROM THE REMOTE
MEETING SERVICE OR HAVE THEIR
CONNECTIONS MUTED HOPEFULLY WE
WON'T HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT TODAY
. WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM
THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER
AFFAIRS DIVISION OF
INVESTIGATION OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA AND THE CALIFORNIA
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. WHO WERE
ALL PARTICIPATING REMOTELY. FOR
OUR REMOTE PARTICIPANTS PLEASE
REMAIN MUTE YOUR PHONES AND YOUR
COMPUTERS AS APPROPRIATE THIS
WILL GREATLY AID IN ELIMINATING
ANY ACOUSTIC FEEDBACK. I S. IT
EVERY TIME YOU WISH TO BE
RECOGNIZED THAT YOU USED TO
RAISE YOUR HAND FEATURE IN THE
PROGRAM EACH TIME YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK A POP UP
WINDOW WILL APPEAR ASKING IF YOU
WOULD LIKE TO ON MUTE. PLEASE
SELECT ON MUTE BEFORE YOU BEGIN
SPEAKING OUR I. T. PERSONNEL
WILL THEN PUT YOU BACK ON MUTE
WHEN YOU ARE DONE. ONCE
RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK PLEASE MAKE
SURE THAT YOU CAN BE SEEN ON THE
SCREEN A STATE YOUR NAME AND
THEN YOU WILL BE READY TO
ADDRESS. ALL OF US HERE IN THE
COMMITTEE HEARING ROOM. FOR
TODAY'S HEARING WILL BE WE WILL
BE HEARING ALL OF THE PANELS OF
WITNESSES ON THE AGENDA PRIOR TO
TAKING ANY PUBLIC COMMENT. ONCE
WE HAVE HEARD ALL OF THE
WITNESSES. WE WILL HAVE A PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD FOR THOSE WHO
WISH TO COMMENT ON THE TOPICS.
ON TODAY'S AGENDA. THE MEDICAL
BOARD OF CALIFORNIA REMAINS THE
FOCUS OF NUMEROUS DISCUSSIONS AS
THIS COMMITTEE CONTINUES TO
EVALUATE THE IMPORTANCE. OF
EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
THROUGH OUR SUNSET REVIEW
PROCESS. TODAY'S HEARING WILL
PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A
PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT REFORMS
TO THE MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT. AND
BOARD OPERATIONS REFORMS
PROPOSED. BY THE MEDICAL BOARD.
AS WE CONTINUE TO GATHER
INFORMATION AND INPUT TO GUIDE
OUR ON GOING OVERSIGHT OF THIS
VERY VERY IMPORTANT PROGRAM. AS
YOU ALL KNOW ON JANUARY. ONE TWO
THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR. THE
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA WILL
CEASE TO EXIST WITHOUT
LEGISLATION CONTINUING ITS
OPERATIONS THAT'S JANUARY. ONE
TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR. THE
GOAL FOR ALL OF OUR DISCUSSIONS
IS TO DETERMINE THE BEST CASE
AND THE BEST COURSE FORWARD. FOR
THIS BOARD MOVING INTO OUR
SUNSET REVIEW OVERSIGHT WORK
NEXT YEAR TO BETTER INFORM OUR
SUNSET REVIEW DISCUSSIONS. IN
THE TIME THAT I'VE HAD THE
PRIVILEGE OF CHAIRING THE CITY
QUÉ SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS
PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT. BERMAN COVERED SOME
SYSTEMIC ISSUES IN THE
FUNDAMENTAL INTERNAL PROCESS
SEES WITHIN THE BOARD. WHICH
TEND TO NEGATIVELY IMPACT EITHER
ACTUALLY OR PERCENT IF IN TERMS
OF PERCEPTION THE BOARD'S
ABILITY TO FUNCTION EFFECTIVELY
. THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA AS YOU KNOW MOST
QUICKLY AND APPROPRIATELY
INVESTIGATE COMPLAINTS
ESPECIALLY PATIENT COMPLAINTS.
THERE MUST BE CONSISTENT
STANDARDS FOR BOTH DISCIPLINE
AND RELIEF FROM THE SUPPORT. WE
NEED TO EXPLORE WHAT IF ANYTHING
. SERVES AS AN OBSTACLE TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD CONSIDERING
PARTICULARLY EGREGIOUS OFFENSES
AS GROUNDS FOR PERMANENT
REVOCATION OF A PHYSICIAN'S
LICENSE. I REMAIN CONCERNED
ABOUT CLAIMS OF PRIVACY. I USED
TO. PERHAPS CLAIMS THAT ARE WELL
FOUNDED IN CURRENT STATUTE BY
THE WAY. I AM USED TO PREVENT
THE LEGISLATURE FROM EXAMINING
THE RATIONALE USED TO SUPPORT
BOARD DETERMINATIONS
PARTICULARLY IN CASES WHERE
THERE IS ADMITTED CRIMINAL
MISCONDUCT. FOR A CONVICTION FOR
EXAMPLE. PLEASE IN CONSISTENCIES
ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS HAVE
RESULTED IN YEARS OF STRUGGLE TO
EFFECTIVELY DISCIPLINE
PHYSICIANS WHO VIOLATE THE LAW.
INTERFERE WITH OUR ABILITY TO
UNDERSTAND HOW THOSE DECISIONS
ARE MADE IN THE REASONS FOR THEM
. WHICH IN TURN RESULTS IN A
LOSS OF FAITH. BY THE PUBLIC
THAT WE SERVE. I'M COMMITTED TO
EXPLORING THESE MATTERS IN
GREATER DETAIL WITH ALL OF YOU
INTO UNCOVERING THE ROOT CAUSES
OF DYSFUNCTION. IF THERE IS
DYSFUNCTION. THROUGH HEARINGS
LIKE THIS ONE TODAY. THE MEDICAL
BOARD OF CALIFORNIA MUST BE
ARMED WITH THE TOOLS IT NEEDS TO
PURSUE. I SUPPOSE IS THE PROPER
WORD PHYSICIANS WHO PUT THE
PUBLIC AT RISK. ALBUMS CANNOT BE
ALLOWED TO PERSIST AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO HEARING ABOUT
POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS IN THIS CASE
SOLUTIONS PROPOSED BY THE
MEDICAL BOARD ITSELF. THROUGH
THESE VERY IMPORTANT DISCUSSIONS
TODAY. WE WILL HEAR FROM
KATHLEEN NICHOLS DEPUTY CHIEF
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CONSUMER AFFAIRS DIVISION OF
INVESTIGATION HEALTH QUALITY
INVESTIGATION UNIT WHO WILL NOT
PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW AS TO HOW
COMPLAINTS AGAINST MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA LICENSEES ARE
ACTUALLY INVESTIGATED I LOOK
FORWARD TO THIS CONVERSATION
WELCOME AS NICHOLS. GOOD MORNING
MY NAME IS KATHLEEN NICHOLS I AM
THE DEPUTY CHIEF FOR THE HEALTH
FALL THE INVESTIGATION UNIT ALSO
REFERRED TO AS H. YOU ARE YOU AT
THE DIVISION OF INVESTIGATION
WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSUMER AFFAIRS. I AM A SWORN
PEACE OFFICER WITH TWENTY SEVEN
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE WORKING FOR
THE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM OF THE
MEDICAL BOARD AND CURRENTLY OF
THE DIVISION OF INVESTIGATION.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
JOIN YOU TODAY AND PROVIDE AN
OVERVIEW OF EACH YEAR USE
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS. AND SOME
OF THE ROAD BLOCKS WEEKS. CASES
THAT IMPACT CASE COMPLETION
TIMELINE. WE HAVE MANY KIDS
TYPES THAT WE INVESTIGATE EACH
YEAR YEAR WHICH INCLUDED
CRIMINAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
INVESTIGATIONS. TODAY I'D LIKE
TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF
THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS OF
THREE CASE TYPE. SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT OVERPRESCRIBING AND
CONVICTION OF A CRIME CASES AND
SHARE SOME OF THE CHALLENGES WE
EXPERIENCE AS WE CONDUCT
INVESTIGATIONS AND THEN I'D BE
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS
YOU MAY HAVE. I'M GOING TO SHARE
MY SCREEN NOW. AND START THE
PRESENTATION. AND I BELIEVE IT
SAYS THE HOST DISABLED MY SCREEN
SHARING SO SOMEBODY COULD ENABLE
ME. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. YEAH
THE I. HAVE BEEN ASKING TO BE
ENABLED FOR A LONG TIME. COOPER
ABLE TO DO THAT FOR YOU MISS
NICHOLS. K. HOPEFULLY THAT WORKS
HERE WE ARE IT'S PERFECT OKAY.
SO THE FIRST TYPE IS A KEY
STRENGTH IS A SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASE SO WHEN A CASE COMES TO THE
pBY THE MEDICAL BOARD IT'S A SIGN
TO AN ANALYST AND THEN FORWARDED
TO EACH YEAR YOU ELECTRONICALLY
THAT PROCESS CAN TAKE FIVE TO
TEN DAYS IT IS THEN ASSIGNED TO
AN INVESTIGATOR ONE TO THREE
DAYS THE INVESTIGATOR WOULD
REVIEW THE FILE AND CONTACT THE
COMPLAINANTS ONE TO FIFTEEN DAYS
. THE INVESTIGATOR WITH THE
INTERVIEW THE COMPLAINANT
SOMETIMES THE COMPLAINANT MAY
VACILLATE ABOUT WHETHER THEY
STILL WANT TO COOPERATE OR
PERHAPS THEY MAY WANT TO RETURN
YOUR THERAPIST TO BE PRESENT. IN
COURT MAYBE MOST SCHEDULES OFTEN
TAKES TIME BEST CASE SCENARIO
FIFTEEN TO SIXTY DAYS. THE
COMPLAINANT INTERVIEW THEN TAKES
PLACE THE INVESTIGATOR COLLECTS
ANY EVIDENCE THAT COULD BE
EMAILS TEXT MESSAGES PHOTOS
THINGS FROM SOCIAL MEDIA IN RARE
SITUATIONS IF THERE WAS PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE AND DNA TESTING HAS
UNDERTAKEN BACK CAN TAKE THREE
TO SIX MONTHS. THE INVESTIGATOR
THEN MAKES A DETERMINATION ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT THE CASE CAN BE
PURSUED CRIMINALLY AND WHAT
METHODS OF EVIDENCE ARE VIABLE.
IT MAY REQUIRE THE INVESTIGATOR
TO WORK WITH THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR CERTAIN
ASPECTS OF PERMISSIONS FOR
EXAMPLE IF WE WANT TO
SURREPTITIOUSLY RECORD A PRE TAX
CALL BETWEEN THE VICTIM AND THE
DOCTOR WE WOULD NEED PERMISSION
FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE. THE INVESTIGATOR WOULD
THEN ESTABLISH A PATIENT
PHYSICIAN RELATIONSHIP WHICH IS
USUALLY DONE VIA MEDICAL AND
PRESCRIBING RECORDS WE WOULD
OBTAIN AND ANALYZE. DATA AND IF
TÍNH ORIGINAL PRESCRIPTION WHICH
WOULD TAKE SEVEN TO FOURTEEN
DAYS. INVESTIGATOR CAN WRITE A
SEARCH WARRANT IF IT'S A
CRIMINAL CASE OR REQUEST RECORDS
FROM A PHYSICIAN AND USUALLY IF
WE HAVE A PATIENT SIGNED
AUTHORIZATION WE WILL REQUEST
THE RECORDS THAT WAY. WE EVEN
HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE RECORDS
FIFTEEN TO THIRTY DAYS IT'S
ACTUALLY VERY RARE FOR THE
RECORDS TO BE PRODUCED ON TIME
AND THE REMEDIES FOR FAILING TO
PROVIDE RECORDS PURSUANT TO
STATUTE CAN BE TIME CONSUMING.
IF THE RECORDS WE RECEIVE ARE
LEGIBLE IT MAY REQUIRE US TO ASK
THE PHYSICIAN TO TRANSCRIBE THE
RECORDS. IF THIS CERTIFICATION
OF RECORDS IS NOT ACCURATELY
COMPLETED AND THAT IS WHEN WE
ASK FOR CERTIFIED RECORDS. THE
CERTIFICATION INCLUDES A PAGE
COUNTS SO WE HAVE TO RECONCILE
WHETHER THE NUMBER OF PAGES THEY
PUT ON THE CERTIFICATION MATCHES
THE NUMBER OF RECORDS THAT WE
RECEIVED. WHICH ALMOST NEVER
HAPPENS SO TO REMEDY THAT SEVEN
TO FORTY FIVE DAYS. IF THE
COMPLAINANT TOLD OTHER PARTIES
ABOUT THE ALLEGED MISCONDUCT
THOSE INDIVIDUALS MUST BE
INTERVIEWED AS PART OF THE
INVESTIGATION. THAT COULD
INCLUDE OFFICE STAFF IN THE
CHAPERONES THAT WERE IN THE ROOM
THAT MAY HAVE OBSERVED THE
CONTACT. IF THEY TOLD THEIR
THERAPISTS- FIFTEEN TO THIRTY
DAYS. AND IF THE COMPLAINANT
TOLD HER THERAPIST ABOUT IT
THOSE THERAPY RECORDS MUST BE
OBTAINED WHICH WOULD TAKE
ANOTHER FIFTEEN TO THIRTY DAYS.
THE CASE IS SUBMITTED TO A FIELD
OFFICE MEDICAL COULD. FOR
PREPARATION OF THE SUBJECT
INTERVIEW FIFTEEN TO THIRTY
DAYS. THE SUBJECT INTERVIEW IS
THEN SCHEDULED MOST PHYSICIANS
HAVE ATTORNEYS SO THEN WE HAVE
TO COORDINATE THE SCHEDULE OF
THE SUBJECT PHYSICIAN THERE
ATTORNEY. OUR MEDICAL CONSULTANT
IN THE INVESTIGATOR BEST CASE
SCENARIO THIRTY TO NINETY DAYS.
USUALLY THE SUBJECT WILL REQUEST
A SUMMARY OF THE COMPLAINT THAT
THE MEDICAL BOARD MUST PREPARE
PURSUANT TO BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION EIGHT
HUNDRED SEAT. FIFTEEN TO THIRTY
DAYS. AFTER THE SUBJECT
INTERVIEW THE EXPERT PACKAGES
PREPARED AND THE CASE IS SET TO
AN EXPERT IN THE SAME SPECIALTY
AS THE SUBJECT PHYSICIAN. THIRTY
TO SIXTY DAYS. SOMETIMES A
SECOND EXPERT OPINION IS
REQUESTED IF THE FIRST OPINION
HAS ANY ISSUES AND THAT PROCESS
WOULD TAKE ANOTHER THIRTY TO
SIXTY DAY. SO BEST CASE SCENARIO
A HUNDRED AND EIGHTY FOUR DAYS
TO COMPLETE THAT INVESTIGATION
BUT ASSUMES FULL STAFFING IT
ASSUMES THE SORTEST TIME FRAMES
NO ISSUE OF TRAINING RECORDS
SCHEDULING INTERVIEWS NO
EVIDENCE NEEDS TO BE ANALYSED.
ANY EXPERT OPINION IS RECEIVED
ON TIME WITHOUT NEED FOR SECOND
EXPERT. WORST CASE SCENARIO
THAT'S A CASE THAT COULD BE
SEVEN HUNDRED PLUS DAYS OLD WHAT
IS TO MORE CURRENT STAFFING
LEVELS AT THE END OF MAY H. YOU
ARE YOU WILL HAVE TWENTY ONE
INVESTIGATOR VACANCIES WHICH IS
A 25% INVESTIGATOR VACANCY RATE.
WE WERE DOING GREAT WITH OUR
INVESTIGATOR VACANCIES WE ONLY
HAD FOUR IN NOVEMBER OF TWENTY
TWENTY BUT LAST SEPTEMBER DOJ
SPECIAL AGENTS IN THE SAME
BARGAINING UNIT AS OUR
INVESTIGATORS WERE ABLE TO SIGN
A SIDE LETTER WITH TELLING
TARGETING THEIR AGENTS A 12% PAY
INCREASE. AS A RESULT WE HAD
EIGHT INVESTIGATORS IMMEDIATELY
NOTIFY THEIR BACKGROUND FOR DEAL
OKAY TO RECEIVE A SEVENTEEN AND
A HALF PAY INCREASE BECAUSE THEY
ALREADY WERE FIVE AND A HALF
PERCENT HIGHER PRIOR TO THE 12%
INCREASE SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT THE
SEVENTEEN POINT FIVE PERCENT.
AND A MUCH REDUCED CASELOADS.
AND BESIDES STAFFING LEVELS THIS
SCENARIO ASSUMES ALL STALL
TACTICS BY THE PHYSICIAN AND
THEIR DEFENSE ATTORNEY FAILING
TO GIVE US RECORDS ON TIME NOT
COOPERATING WITH COMING IN FOR A
PHYSICIAN INTERVIEW. AND THE
SCENARIO ALSO ASSUMES
PROBLEMATIC IN AN UNTIMELY FIRST. EXPERT OPINION. THE NEXT CASE
TYPE BY LIKE TO JUST THIS
PRESCRIBING. METTMANN WEEK MAYBE
ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE OFF
OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT I GUESS I
COULD LET YOU FINISH IF YOU
WOULD PREFER BUT I THOUGHT MAYBE
IF WE- ASK SOME OF MAY BE
PARTICULARLY RELATED TO.
PARTICULAR K. TYPES OF CASE
CASES THAT MIGHT FURTHER THE
CONVERSATION. SO LET ME JUST
TELL ME JUST ASK A COUPLE. IN
THIS IN THE CASE OF SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT YOUR YOUR ATTEMPT TO
GAIN THE MEDICAL RECORDS- IS
TIME STILL AN ISSUE IN TERMS OF
TIME FOR COMPLIANCE STILL AN
ISSUE EVEN OR THE PATIENT
CONSENTS. YES BECAUSE WE IF THE
PATIENT WOULD CONSENT TO MAKE
GIVE US A RELEASE TO OBTAIN
THEIR MEDICAL RECORDS WHICH WE
DO AND WE WILL ASK THE PHYSICIAN
TO PROVIDE THOSE RECORDS WITHIN
FIFTEEN DAYS BUT OFTEN TIMES WE
DON'T GET THEM TIMELY SO THAT'S
ONE ISSUE BUT EVEN IF WE RECEIVE
THE RECORDS QUICKLY. PART OF THE
PROCESS IS TO INTERVIEW ABOUT
PHYSICIAN AND THAT'S WHERE A LOT
OF THE DELAYS HAPPEN AS WELL. A
WITH RESPECT TO THE CONCERT
ITSELF. HAVE YOU EXPERIENCED
SITUATIONS WHERE- PATIENTS HAVE
WITHDRAWN CONSENT. YES AND NOT I
WAS GOING TO DISCUSS IN MORE
DETAIL IN THE PRESCRIBING CASE
SCENARIO BECAUSE THAT'S NORMALLY
WHERE WE SEE IT- WITH THOSE CASE
TYPE BUT YES- SOMETIMES PATIENTS
ARE CONTACTED BY THE PHYSICIANS
AND PRESSURED TO RESCIND THEIR
AUTHORIZATION. SO IN THE CASE OF
BOTH THE FAILURE TO TIMELY
RESPOND WITH RECORDS. EVEN IN
THE FACE OF PATIENT CONSENT WERE
YOU'RE NOT ARGUING OVER THE-
CONTENTS OF A SUBPOENA OR THE
LEGALITY OF A SUBPOENA AND THE
PHYSICIAN FAILS TO RESPOND. AND
OR IN CASES WHERE CONSENT IS
GIVEN IN THE PHYSICIAN ATTEMPTS
TO PERSUADE THE PATIENT TO
WITHDRAW CONSENT. TO THOSE ACTS
IN AND OF THEMSELVES CONSTITUTE
A VIOLATION OF THE MEDICAL
PRACTICE ACT. I WOULD ARGUE THAT
IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED UNDER
UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT BUT NOW
WE HAVE NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL AND
HELPING THOSE CASES FILED FOR
JUST BAD BEHAVIOR A LOT. OF THE
MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT MIGHT HAVE
TO BE MADE MORE SPECIFIC IN THAT
REGARD IN ORDER TO. SERVE NOTICE
ON ALL INVOLVED THAT THIS COULD
CONSTITUTE UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT. YES THAT WOULD
CERTAINLY HELP. SO ONE OTHER
QUESTION I NOTICE. THE USE OF
THE PHRASE FIELD OFFICE MEDICAL
CONSULTANT IS THAT AN EXPERT. NO
WE HAVE AT THE DIVISION OF
INVESTIGATION OUR FIELD OFFICES
WE EMPLOYEE- DISTRICT MEDICAL
CONSULTANTS THEY ARE PERMANENT
INTERMITTENT EMPLOYEES AND EACH
FIELD OFFICE HAS APPROXIMATELY
TWO TO THREE DISTRICT MEDICAL
CONSULTANTS WORKING IN OFFICE
THEY WORK CLOSELY WITH THE
INVESTIGATORS AND HELP TRANSLATE
SOME OF THE MEDICINE AND THE
MEDICAL RECORDS. AND THEN THEY
ALSO PARTICIPATE IN THE
INTERVIEW WITH THE SUBJECTS
PHYSICIAN AND THE INVESTIGATOR
AND THERE ARE EMPLOYEES BUT THEN
WHEN THE CASE GOES OUT FOR
EXPERT REVIEW THAT'S OUTSIDE OF
OUR ORGANIZATION AND BOX WE
UTILIZE EXPERTS ON THE MEDICAL
BOARD'S EXPERT LISTS. BUT IT%
ALSO NOTE IN THE POWER POINT
THAT AT SOME POINT- FAIRLY EARLY
ON IN THE PROCEEDINGS THAT YOU
UTILIZE THE SERVICES OF AN
EXPERT IN THE SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASES. THE EXPERT IS USUALLY AT
THE END OF THE PROCESS ONCE THE
INVESTIGATION IS COMPLETE THE
CASE WITH AND BE SENT TO AN
OUTSIDE SPECIALTY ACTS FOR. IS
THAT THE KEY IS THAT THE
SITUATION IN EVERY CASE OF
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. FOR EXAMPLE I
COULD SEE IT IN A IN AN- OBGYN
SITUATION WHERE THE ISSUE WAS
DOES THAT THE CONTACT FORM- FIT
WITHIN THE NORMAL PROTOCOL FOR A
MEDICAL EXAMINATION OR NOT. WERE
YOU MIGHT NEED AN EXPERT TO MAKE
THAT EVALUATION AND TO CALL THE
CASE MAKE THE DISTINCTION ONE
WAY OR THE OTHER BUT WHAT ABOUT
A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S AN
ACTUAL RAPE OR SEXUAL
INTERCOURSE IT'S ENGAGED IN BY
THE PHYSICIAN IN THE COURSE OF A
MEDICAL EXAMINATION DOES THAT
SITUATION REQUIRE A MEDICAL
EXPERT AND IF SO FOR WHAT
PURPOSE. YES OUR CURRENT PROCESS
REQUIRES US TO OBTAIN EXPERT
OPINIONS IN ALL THOSE CASES AND
THAT IS AT THE REQUEST OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AND
THEY FEEL THAT THAT EVIDENCE IS
NECESSARY IN ORDER TO FILE THE
CASE. WELL WHEN WE GET TO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL MAYBE THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
REPRESENTATIVES COULD TELL ME
WHAT VALUE ADDED AN EXPERT
OPINION IS. IN THE CASE OF
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WERE THE
ACTUAL MISCONDUCT IS FOR
EXAMPLE. A RAPE. OR NON
CONSENSUAL. SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
IN THE CONDUCT OF A MEDICAL
EXAMINATION. BUT WE'LL WAIT FOR
THAT. COLLEAGUES ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON I
THOUGHT WE MIGHT. IF YOU HAVE
ANY ON ON THE SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
INVESTIGATIONS WE COULD ASK THEM
. DON'T HAVE TO OKAY HEARING
NONE MYSTICAL SORT INTERRUPT YOU
OPEN THE TRAIN CAN START BACK ON
THE TRACK. OKAY SO NOW ON TO
PRESCRIBING CASES AND THE
INITIAL STEPS ARE SIMILAR TO THE
LAST CASE TYPE OF CASE THE
COMPLAINT WOULD BE RECEIVED BY
THE MEDICAL BOARD ASSIGNED TO AN
ANALYST FORWARDED TO H. W.
ELECTRONICALLY WHERE IT WOULD BE
ASSIGNED TO AN INVESTIGATOR. THE
INVESTIGATOR WOULD REVIEW THE
FILE AND CONTACT THE COMPLAINANT
ONE TO FIFTEEN DAYS IF
APPROPRIATE WE WOULD CONDUCT
SURVEILLANCE AND THAT COULD BE A
SITUATION WHERE WE RECEIVE AN
ALLEGATION THAT A PHYSICIAN IS
RUNNING HELLO MIL THAT THERE'S
PATIENTS LINED UP AROUND THE
CORNER BEFORE THAT. PRACTICE
OPENS THOSE CASES SURVEILLANCE
WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FIFTEEN TO
SIXTY DAYS- WE WOULD ALSO MIGHT
CONDUCT UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS
AND THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD SEND
AN INVESTIGATOR POSING AS A
PATIENT INTO A PHYSICIAN'S
PRACTICE. THIRTY TO NINETY DAYS
IF IT'S A CRIMINAL CASE WE WOULD
NEED TO DRAFT AND SERVE A SEARCH
WARRANT THIRTY TO SIXTY DAYS.
THEN WHEN IDENTIFIED THE PAY. OF
PRESCRIBING HINTS AND USUALLY
THAT'S UP TO FIVE PATIENTS- THAT
WOULD BE ENOUGH TO PROVE THE
CASE WE WOULD THEN ATTEMPT TO
INTERVIEW ALL THOSE PATIENTS
OBTAIN AUTHORIZATIONS FOR
RELEASE OF THE RECORDS. IF THE
PATIENT AUTHORIZES THE RECORDS
THEN WE WOULD REQUEST THEM FROM
THE PHYSICIAN WHICH WOULD TAKE
THIRTY TO FORTY FIVE DAYS. AND
OTHER RELEVANT PRACTITIONERS
OFTEN TIMES PEOPLE SEE HAVE
RECORDS THAT HAPPENED AFTER THEY
SAW THE SUBJECT- BEFORE AND WE
WOULD HAVE TO OBTAIN THE
INVESTIGATOR WOULD THEN PERFORM
PHARMACY AUDITS. THIRTY TO
NINETY DAYS DEPENDING ON THE
VOLUME AND WHETHER OR NOT THE
PHARMACY COOPERATES OFTENTIMES
THESE PRESCRIPTIONS ARE SPREAD
OVER A LARGE GEOGRAPHIC AREA
INVOLVING MULTIPLE PHARMACIES.
AND THEN FREQUENTLY THE PATIENT
WHO SIGNS THAT AUTHORIZATION TO
RELEASE THEIR RECORDS WILL
CHANGE THEIR MIND AFTER BEING
CONTACTED BY THE SUBJECT OR THE
SUBJECT'S REPRESENTATIVES WHICH
WILL REQUIRE US TO ISSUE A
SUBPOENA. WE RECENTLY HAD A CASE
A FEW MONTHS AGO WORK PATIENTS
SIGNED AN AUTHORIZATION WE
SERVED ON THE PHYSICIAN TO GET
THE RECORDS. AND THEN CENTERS
BACK SOMETHING SAYING OH HERE'S
A DOCUMENT THE PATIENT RESCINDED
THEIR RELEASE. WHICH WAS
SURPRISING TO THE INVESTIGATOR
BECAUSE THE PATIENT WAS VERY
COOPERATIVE WHEN WE HAD SPOKEN
ABOUT. SO THE INVESTIGATOR
CALLED THE PATIENT AND WAS
INFORMED THAT THE PHYSICIAN SENT
AN OFFICE MANAGER PHYSICALLY TO
DRIVE TO THE PATIENT'S HOUSE.
AND HAVE HER SIGN A BUNCH OF
PAPERS UNDER THE GUISE THAT THEY
WERE UPDATING HER CHART FOR THE
YEAR THE PATIENT HAD NO IDEA
WHAT SHE HAD SIGNED. BUT IT. UP
SHE DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE HER
DOCTOR MAD AT HER SO SHE SAID
SHE WASN'T WILLING TO PURSUE IT
ANY FURTHER. SO THAT NOT TEXAS
BACK IN A SITUATION WHERE WE
HAVE TO SUBPOENA THOSE RECORDS
AND IN ORDER TO DO THAT. JESTER
WILL CONSULTANT TO REVIEW THE
CASE AND PROVIDE A STATEMENT OF
GOOD BECAUSE BEFORE THAT
SUBPOENA CAN BE ISSUE. SO THAT
WOULD TAKE THIRTY. AND THEN WHEN
WE SERVE THAT SUBPOENA A LOT OF
TIMES THE DOCTORS STILL REFUSE
TO PROVIDE. US THE RECORD. ROB
THIS AT THAT POINT IS I TO REFER
THEM. TO THE ATTORNEY. OFFICE
FOR THEM TO FOR SUIT. AND FOR.
THAT IS DONE IN THE COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT SYSTEM. AND IT
COULD TAKE SIX MONTHS TO TWO
YEARS FOR THAT CASE TO BE HEARD.
AND DEPENDING ON HOW FAR IT
GOES. THAT STATUTE JUST KEEP
RUNNING NOTHING STOPS THE
STATUTE AT THAT POINT. AND SOME
OF OUR CASES HAVE GONE ALL THE
WAY TO SUPREME COURT REGARDING
SUBPOENA ENFORCEMENT. THE
MEDICAL CONSULTANT ONCE WE DO
HAVE THE RECORDS WITHIN PREPARE
FOR THE SUBJECT INTERVIEW. WITH
ALL THE RECORDS THAT WE RECEIVED
THIRTY TO NINETY DAYS DEPENDING
ON THE VOLUME THE PHYSICIAN
WOULD NEED TO BE INTERVIEWED
MINIMUM THIRTY TO SIXTY DAYS.
THE EXPERT PACKAGE WOULD NEED TO
BE PREPARED THIRTY DAYS. WITHIN
REVIEW THE CASE THIRTY TO NINETY
DAYS DEPENDING ON HOW VOLUMINOUS
AND HOW MANY PATIENTS ARE
INVOLVED. AND THEN IF THERE'S A
PROBLEM WITH THE FIRST OPINION
THEN WE'RE REQUIRED TO GET A
SECOND EXPERT REVIEW WHICH WOULD
TAKE THIRTY TO NINETY DAYS.
DEPENDING ON THE VOLUME OF THE
CASE. SO BEST CASE SCENARIO
ASSUMING SINGLE PATIENT
ADMINISTRATIVE NO OBSTACLES WE
CAN COMPLETE THAT CASE WITHIN
TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY TODAY.
WORST CASE SCENARIO ASSUMES ON
MULTIPLE PATIENT CASE THOUSAND
PLUS DAYS AND THIS DOESN'T EVEN
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SEVERAL OTHER
PERSPECTIVE DELAY SUCH AS THE
INCORRECT CERTIFICATIONS OF
RECORDS. IF WE HAVE TO ISSUE A
PERSONAL APPEARANCE SUBPOENA FOR
THE PHYSICIAN TO ATTEND THE
INTERVIEW. THEY DON'T COOPERATE
AND THEY STILL DON'T SHOW UP WE
WOULD THEN HAVE TO GO TO
SUPERIOR COURT TO ENFORCE FACT
SUBPOENA. OUR STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS IS THREE YEARS A
THOUSAND AND NINETY FIVE DAYS
FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF A
COMPLAINT. OR INFORMATION UPON
WHICH THE CASE WAS OPENED THE
STATURE IT CAN ONLY BE TOLD WHEN
A COURT ORDER IS ISSUED UNTIL
THE TIME THE RECORDS ARE
PRODUCED. BUT AS MENTIONED THIS
IS VERY LATE IN THE PROCESS SO
THERE'S A LOT OF CASES THAT AS
THE RUNNING UP AGAINST THE
STATUTE AND A DOCTOR REFUSES TO
PROVIDE US THE RECORDS WE DON'T
EVEN HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO PURSUE
SUBPOENA ENFORCEMENT AND
UNFORTUNATELY THOSE CASES HAVE
TO BE CLOSE. BECAUSE THERE'S
JUST NOT ENOUGH TIME TO GO
THROUGH THAT LENGTHY PROCESS.
THE NEXT CASE TYPE I'D LIKE TO.
MYSTICAL TESCO'S BUT I. I'M OLD
AND I FORGET THE THINGS I WANT
TO ASK ABOUT IF I DON'T AT LEAST
LIKE A- WITH RESPECT TO
PHARMACISTS AND THE IN.
PRODUCING RECORDS IN THESE.
PRESCRIBING CASES. DO YOU KNOW
DOES A PHARMACIST OR A PHARMACY
HAVE A DUTY. TO COOPERATE WITH
THE- WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD
ABSENT SOME. RIGHT UNDER THE
CONSTITUTION TO NOT COOPERATE
WHICH EVERYBODY KNOWS HOW TO
ASSERT THAT DO YOU KNOW. WELL
THERE'S SEVERAL SECTIONS THAT
REQUIRE THEM TO GIVE US
DOCUMENTS IT'S THE TIME FRAME
THAT'S NOT REALLY ARTICULATED
AND ALSO THE PENALTY IF THEY
REFUSED TO GIVE IT TO US ON TIME
SO ULTIMATELY YOU KNOW WE ARE
ABLE TO GET THESE RECORDS BUT A
LOT OF TIME WE ARE FIGHTING WITH
THE PHARMACIES AND OTHER WORDS
IT'S A CHAIN PHARMACY YOU KNOW
CVS RITE AID WALGREENS. YOU KNOW
WE GO IN TO GET THEM SHOW THEM
THE CODE SECTION YOU KNOW YOU
NEED TO PROVIDE US THESE RECORDS
THEY WANT TO CALL THE CORPORATE
OFFICE IT HAS TO GO THROUGH
LEGAL THE PERSON THEIR
INFORMATION IS FUNNELED YOU KNOW
THROUGH THE EAST COAST AND THEN
IT COMES BACK. SOMETIMES IT'S
NOT VERY TIMELY WELL. HI MY
RECOLLECTIONS ARE REGULATED BY
THE PHARMACY BOARD AS WELL SO
WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IS IF WE
SPECIFY SOME REASONABLE TIME FOR
RESPONSE WHEN. WE REQUEST YOU
BERMAN RECORDS FROM PHARMACY
OPERATIONS CORRECT YES THAT
WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL AND THEN
ONE FINAL QUESTION ON THE-
PHYSICIANS WHO'VE DECIDED THEY
JUST DON'T WANT TO SHOW UP WHEN
THEY'RE- SOMEONE TO A MEETING-
DO YOU KNOW IN THE MEDICAL
PRACTICE ACT IS THERE A DUTY TO.
RESPOND TO THE MEDICAL BOARD
ABSENT AGAIN SOME CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT IT'S IMPLICATED WHICH-
BOTH PHYSICIANS AND LAWYERS WILL
KNOW HOW TO EXERCISE. WELL
THERE'S A SECTION THAT TENDS TO
DEAL WITH THAT TWENTY TO THIRTY
FOUR AGE WHICH SAYS THAT ABSENT
GOOD CAUSE THE PHYSICIAN NEEDS
TO COOPERATE WITH THE BOARD FOR
AN INTERVIEW. BUT THE REAL
RABBIT SMALL WHAT IS GOOD COST
ME. SAN DELAYS THEN THEY WANT TO
HIRE AN ATTORNEY WHICH IS FINE
WE GIVE THEM TIME TO DO THAT
THEN THE ATTORNEY SAYS WELL I'M
IN TRIAL I YOU KNOW I DON'T HAVE
AVAILABILITY FOR THREE MONTHS.
AND SO FAR WE HAVE NOT BEEN
SUCCESSFUL WITH THE
INTERPRETATION OF IT THEIR QUOTE
BUSY THAT WELL MAYBE THAT'S GOOD
CAUGHT AND UNFORTUNATELY IT JUST
DRAGS THESE CASES OUT I'VE SEEN
CASES WHERE IT'S TAKEN US A YEAR
TO GET A POSITION IN FOR AN
INTERVIEW- SO I REALLY THINK
THAT THAT SECTION NEEDS TO HAVE
MORE SPECIFICITY. ABOUT WHAT IS
THE TIME FRAME FOR HAVING A
PHYSICIAN COME INTO COOPERATE
WITH AN INTERVIEW WITH THE BOARD
OR AT THE VERY LEAST THEN THE
STATURE LIMITATIONS SHOULD BE
COLD. DURING THAT PERIOD OF NON
COOPERATION. RIGHT WE CERTAINLY
DON'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH A
PHYSICIAN'S ABILITY TO CONSULT
WITH AND UTILIZE THE SERVICES OF
A LAWYER- THAT'S- OBVIOUSLY WELL
INGRAINED IN OUR- IN OUR SOCIETY
AND OUR AND OUR LEGAL RULES AND
CONSTITUTIONAL RULES IN SOME
CASES. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND-
SHOWING UP DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE
TO SPEAK- AND THEIR WAYS TO
ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS IN THAT- IN
THAT ENVIRONMENT SO PERHAPS WE
NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT TOO
AND MAYBE WE'LL DO THAT- OR WE
WILL DO THAT ACTUALLY MYSTICAL
PLEASE PROCEED UNLESS MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. OKAY THE NEXT CASE
STUDY IT WOULD BE CONVICTION OF
A CRIME CASES AND THESE WOULD
INCLUDE ALL CONVICTIONS EXCEPT
FOR BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
CODE SECTION TWENTY TO THIRTY
TWO REGARDING REGISTERED SEX
OFFENDERS AND I'LL TALK ABOUT
THAT A LITTLE LATER BUT ON THE
EAST CONVICTION OF A CRIME CASE
TYPES THE COMPLAINTS RECEIVED BY
THE MEDICAL BOARD ASSIGNED TO AN
ANALYST FORWARDED TO H. Q. ARE
YOU IT'S ASSIGNED TO AN
INVESTIGATOR WHO WOULD THEN
REVIEW THE FILE WE WOULD OBTAIN
A CERTIFIED JUDGMENT OF
CONVICTION ANY POLICE REPORTS-COURT TRANSCRIPTS. WE WOULD
OBTAIN- ANYWHERE OTHER RELEVANT
DOCUMENTS AND OTHER THAN MAKING
SURE WE HAVE ALL THE CERTIFIED
POLICE REPORTS- THAT WOULD TAKE
FIFTEEN TO SIXTY DAYS THE
SUBJECT INTERVIEW IT'S BEEN
SCHEDULED AND AS MENTIONED MOST
HAVE ATTORNEY SO WE HAVE TO
COORDINATE THEIR SCHEDULES OF
EVERYONE BEST CASE SCENARIO
THIRTY TO NINETY DAYS AND THEN
WE NEED AN EXPERT OPINION TO
SHOW SUBSTANTIAL RELATIONSHIP TO
THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE. AND I
. IN ANOTHER THIRTY TO SIXTY.
BEST CASE SCENARIO NO.
APPROXIMATE HOW AND ELEVEN DATES
. WORST SCENARIO WHAT IS MOST OF
OPS AND A PROBLEMATIC EXPERT
OPINION THAT CONVICTION OF A
CRIME CASE COULD TAKE UP TO
THREE HUNDRED PLUS STATE. AND
THE PROBLEM WITH THE SUBSTANTIAL
RELATIONSHIP TO THE PRACTICE OF
MEDICINE IS THAT AN EXPERT
REVIEW MUST BE OBTAINED TO SHOW
THAT SUBSTANTIAL RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE CONVICTION AND THE
PRACTICE OF MEDICINE. THIS IS A
TREMENDOUS ISSUE WHEN THE EXPERT
CANNOT FIND SUCH A RELATIONSHIP
AN EXAMPLE I'D LIKE TO SHARE IS
WE HAD A PHYSICIAN WHO HIRED A
HIT MAN TO KILL HIS ACCOUNT. AND
WHEN HE MET WITH WHAT HE THOUGHT
WAS THE HIT MAN IT WAS ACTUALLY
AN UNDERCOVER POLICE OFFICER
WHEN HE MET WITH THAT PERSON HE
SAID I CHANGE MY MIND. I DON'T
WANT TO KILL HIM BUT I WANT TO
BREAK BOTH OF HIS KNEES AND
SERIOUSLY INJURE. THE DOCTOR WAS
CONVICTED OF THAT BEHAVIOR BUT
THEN WE WHEN WE HAVE THE
CONVICTION DOCUMENTS WE HAD TO
SEND THE CASE TO AN EXPERT TO
REVIEW FOR THE SUBSTANTIAL
RELATIONSHIP AND THE EXPERT
OPINION WE GOT BACK SAID THAT IT
WAS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY RELATED TO
THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE. EXPERT
WAS TAKING IT VERY LITERALLY
ABOUT MEDICINE AND NOT THINKING
AND A BROADER SENSE OF THE MORAL
QUALIFICATIONS. FOR BEING A
LICENSED PHYSICIAN IN CALIFORNIA
SO WHEN I CASE WASN'T ORIGINALLY
REFERRED IT WAS REJECTED. SO
ALTERNATELY WE WERE ABLE TO
FILED BY CASE BUT IT TOOK
SENDING THE CASE TO ANOTHER
EXPERTS TRYING TO RECONCILE THE
FIRST OPINION WE HAD- WHICH WAS
NOT APPROPRIATE AND ALTHOUGH THE
CASE TO BE FILED THERE WITH MANY
MONTHS OF A DELAY. SO THAT'S
KIND OF AN EXTREME EXAMPLE BUT
IT SHOWS YOU HOW EVEN WHEN
SOMETHING IS SO OBVIOUS THAT YOU
SHOULD BE ABLE TO FILE
IMMEDIATELY THIS PROCESS
SOMETIMES CREATE DELAYS HOWEVER. I HAVE AN EXAMPLE FOR YOU SO.
WE HAVE A OB. AND SACRAMENTO.
THE PRACTICE LOTS OF PATIENCE
TAKES A PARTICULAR LIKING TO A
FEMALE PATIENT DOESN'T ACT ON
THAT IN THE OFFICE SETTING. YET
THE WEEK AFTER THE PATIENT WAS
IN THE PHYSICIAN'S OFFICE THE
PHYSICIAN SEES HER ON THE
CAPITOL MALL AT TEN O'CLOCK AT
NIGHT. PERHAPS EVEN KNOWS THAT
THE INDIVIDUAL WORKS IN THE
LEGISLATURE AND IS ASSOCIATED
WITH A CAPITAL IN SOME WAY AND
THAT SHE WORKS LATE. HE SEES HER
IN THE CAPITOL MALL. THE
PHYSICIAN OFF DUTY OBVIOUSLY.
SALZER RAPE SIR. IT'S ULTIMATELY
CAUGHT PROSECUTED CONVICTED WITH
THAT CASE ALSO REQUIRE THE
RETENTION OF AN EXPERT TO
DETERMINE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN
THE VISIT IN THE OBG WHY OFFICE
OF WOULD YOU AYE AND OFFICE A
WEEK EARLIER. AND THE RAPE IN
THE CAPITOL MALL. YES OUR
CURRENT PROCESS REQUIRES US TO
OBTAIN EXPERT OPINIONS ON ALL
CASES AND THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS
THE ONES- REGARDING THE
REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS THAT'S
THE ONLY ONE IN EVERY OTHER CASE
TYPED NEEDS AN EXPERT OPINION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT PLEASE PLEASE
PROCEED. AND SPEAKING OF THAT
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
SECTION TWENTY TO THIRTY TWO
IT'S AN EXTREMELY HELPFUL LAW
THAT CALLS FOR THE AUTOMATIC
REVOCATION OF A PHYSICIAN WHO IS
REQUIRED TO REGISTER AS A SEX
OFFENDER THE MEDICAL BOARD ONLY
HAS TO OBTAIN CERTIFIED
CONVICTION DOCUMENTS
DEMONSTRATING THIS REQUIREMENT
THAT IS ALL NO EXPERT OPINION AS
REQUIRED. IT IS TIME FRIENDLY
AND COST FRIENDLY SO PERHAPS
THIS IS THE SECTION THAT COULD
BE EXPANDED TO COVER OTHER TYPES
OF CONDUCT. AND SOMETIMES A
DOCTOR IS NOT CONVICTED OF A
CRIME THEY'RE ARRESTED FOR
CRIMES AND THEY CAN BE ARRESTED
FOR ANYTHING DRIVING UNDER THE
INFLUENCE. SHINING A LIGHT AN
LAPD HELICOPTER OR POSSESSION OF
DRUG PARAPHERNALIA FRAUD EXCITED
RIGHT AND THE PROCESS IN THOSE
CASES THAT PENAL CODE SECTION
TWENTY THREE PERMITS THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE TO
REQUEST THE CRIMINAL COURT.
SUSPEND OR LIMIT THE SUBJECTS
PRACTICE DURING THE PENDENCY OF
THE CRIMINAL CASE BUT THIS IS
DIFFICULT SOMETIMES AND WHAT THE
CIRCUMSTANCES ARE PARTICULARLY
EGREGIOUS. AND SOMETIMES THE
INVESTIGATING AGENCY WILL NOT
SHARE THE INFORMATION OF THE
UNDERLYING CASE FOR FEAR THAT
THE CRIMINAL CASES BEING
JEOPARDIZED. AND THE BIGGEST
EXAMPLE WE SEE OF THIS IS THEIR
WAY OF MEDIA ARTICLE THAT A
DOCTOR WAS ARRESTED FOR
SOMETHING HORRIBLE AND THEN THE
NEXT SENTENCE IN THE ARTICLE IS
THAT WHILE WE CHECK THE MEDICAL
BOARD WEBSITE IN THERE SHOWING
AN UNRESTRICTED LICENSE. BUT THE
REALITY IS THAT THE BOARD CANNOT
JUST FILE CHARGES BASED ON AN
ARREST A LOAN YOU WOULD EITHER
HAVE TO FOLLOW THE PC TWENTY
THREE PROCESS. OR THE ONLY OTHER
WAY YOU COULD FILE WOULD BE AN
INTERIM SUSPENSION ORDER BUT IN
THAT SITUATION BOARD WOULD HAVE
TO BE PREPARED TO PUT ON THE
ENTIRE CASE WITH ALL THE
UNDERLYING EVIDENCE OF THAT.
TIME WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AND
OFTEN THAT THIRTY DAY WINDOW IS
NOT ENOUGH TIME TO EITHER
PREPARE ALL OF THE EVIDENCE OR
EVEN OBTAINING. BECAUSE AS I
MENTIONED A LOT OF AGENCIES
THAT. THAT RAN THE UNDERLYING
INVESTIGATION THEY WON'T RELEASE
THE RECORDS TO THE BOARD. SO IN
THOSE SITUATIONS WE MONITOR THEM
THE CASE IS THAT THERE'S
CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED IF WE ARE
NOT SUCCESSFUL AT IT P. C.
TWENTY THREE WE CHECK EVERY
CORNER TO CHECK THE STATUS OF
THAT CRIMINAL CASE SO THAT IF
THERE IS A CONNECTION. WE CAN
TIMELY FILE IT BUT THE CRIMINAL
COURT SYSTEM IS BACKLOGGED AS
WELL SO SOME OF THESE CRIMINAL
CASES TAKE YEARS TO RESOLVE. AND
SOMETIMES THE BOARD WHAT IS THE
RISK OF THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS EXPIRING IN THOSE
CASES. SO IT'S NECESSARY FOR THE
INVESTIGATORS TO TRYING QUICKLY
GATHER WHATEVER UNDERLYING
EVIDENCE WE CAN'T TO ESTABLISH.
THE UNDERLYING CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT LED TO MR. ARREST YOU KNOW
WHAT WE ME JUST AS GOOD. I
UNDER. OBVIOUSLY DON'T. BACK TO
ARREST THE RESULT IN CONVICTION
OR THAT HAVEN'T YET RESULT IN
COURT COULD. GENERALLY OUTSIDE
OR WHATEVER THEY DO IN THE
CRIMINAL SYSTEM- CAN YOU GIVE ME
SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF WHERE
THE SECTION TWENTY THREE- EFFORT
WAS ATTEMPTED WHAT SORT OF
CONDUCT- MIGHT'VE POSITION
ENGAGE IN THAT WOULD CAUSE THE
BOARD TO WANT TO SUSPEND THE
PHYSICIAN'S LICENSE TO PRACTICE
MEDICINE. PRIOR TO CONVICTION.
WE'VE BEEN ON ALL KINDS OF CASES
SOMETIMES ASSAULTS INVOLVING
PATIENTS SOMETIMES IT COULD BE
WITH RESPECT TO DRUG CHARGES- IT
COULD BE WITH RESPECT TO FRAUD-
THERE'S A LOT OF TIMES WE'RE THE
WE WILL TRY TO GET A P. C.
TWENTY THREE AND ASKED A JUDGE
IS A CONDITION OF BAIL TO
SUSPEND THAT PHYSICIAN'S
LICENSE- BUT AND SOMETIMES WERE
SUCCESSFUL AND SOMETIMES WE ARE
NOT. HOW ABOUT IN A BUG IN THE-
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT CASE ARENA.
YES ALWAYS AN ESSENTIAL IF THEIR
SEXUAL CHARGES FILED WE WILL-ATTEMPT- THAT PC TWENTY THREE-
ABSOLUTELY WHAT WHAT TENDS TO BE
YOUR SUCCESS RATE IN THOSE CASES
- THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
REGARDING THE STATISTICS OF HOW
MANY P. C. TWENTY THREE IS A
FILE THAT OUR SUCCESSFUL VERSUS
BEING DENIED. I DON'T HAVE THOSE
FIGURES BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY
RESEARCH THAT AND GET THE
INFORMATION BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE THANK YOU THANK YOU
FOR ALLOWING THE INTERRUPTION
OF. SEVEN MEMBERS THANK THANK
YOU CHAIRED JUST QUICKER DRIVEN
SUGGESTIONS FOR WHAT CHANGES WE
COULD MAKE TO MAKE IT EASIER TO
GET. THE PC TWENTY THREE. COOL
WELL AS FAR AS THE PC TWENTY
THREE I MEAN THE DEPARTMENT IS
HAPPY TO WORK WITH THE
LEGISLATURE TO FIND IMPROVEMENTS
TO THE PROCESS- BUT I THINK IN
THAT SITUATION PC TWENTY THREE
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S UP TO
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE TO DECIDE
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO MAKE
IT A CONDITION OF BAIL- IF WE
PERHAPS WANTED. STRONGER ABILITY
TO SUSPEND A PHYSICIAN'S LICENSE
TO PRACTICE THAT MIGHT NEED TO
BE SOMETHING ELSE THAT SPELLED
OUT IN THE BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS CODE. OKAY THANKS.
SERMON FIVE THANK YOU FOR THAT
AND I GUESS ON A RELATED NOTE-
WHEN YOU HAVE A PC TWENTY LIKE
HOW LONG CAN IT LAST I MEAN YOU
SOME OF THESE IT LOOKS LIKE
SOMEBODY'S. CHARGES IN CASES
COULD TAKE YEARS TO RESOLVE- ARE
THERE EVER CONCERNS OR HAS THERE
BEEN LITIGATION ON THE PART OF
SOME OF THESE DOCTORS. ABOUT
MAYBE DUE PROCESS NOT BEING ABLE
TO MAKE A LIVING DURING THIS
PERIOD. NORMALLY THE SUSPENSION
OF A PC TWENTY THREE IS IN IS-
ORDERED IT STAYS UNTIL THE
CRIMINAL IT STAYS IN EFFECT
UNTIL THE CRIMINAL CASE IS
RESOLVED. BUT WE'VE WHAT WE'VE
SEEN IN SOME CASES AS THE PC
TWENTY THREE IS GRANTED THE
PHYSICIAN'S LICENSES SUSPENDED
DURING THE PROCESS BUT THEN A
YEAR YEAR AND A HALF LATER ALL
OF A SUDDEN EITHER. YOU KNOW THE
CASE GETS SETTLED FOR SOMETHING
MUCH LESS SERIOUS OR DISMISSED
AND THEN WE'RE IN THE POSITION
OF WORK STILL BOUND BY THAT
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS SO THEN
WE HAVE A SMALL AMOUNT OF TIME
TO PUT TOGETHER. THE UNDERLYING
EVIDENCE OF THE ACTUAL CONDUCT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU THANK THIS
TACKLES PLEASE PROCEED. OKAY I
ONLY HAVE TWO MORE SLIDES-
ROADBLOCKS TO TIMELY WORKING
THESE INVESTIGATIONS IS THE
CURRENT REQUIREMENT THAT ALL
CASES INVOLVING STRAIGHTFORWARD
UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT. YOU NEED
AN EXPERT OPINION FOR EXAMPLE
ALTERING MEDICAL RECORDS IF WE
CAN PROVE THAT THE ACTION
HAPPENED IT WOULD BE GREAT TO BE
ABLE TO JUST FILED THE CASE
WITHOUT AN EXPERT FOR EXAMPLE WE
RECENTLY HAD A CASE THAT DID
INVOLVED. L. TO REGION OF
MEDICAL RECORDS IT WAS A LENGTHY
INVESTIGATION IT WENT TO THE
OXFORD. THE EXPERTS FOUND THAT
THE DOCTOR CULTURE THE RECORDS
BUT THEN CALLED THAT ALTERATION
A SIMPLE DEPARTURE IN THEIR
REPORT. AND THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE WAS NOT ABLE TO
FILE THE CASE. SO THAT IS. THAT
IS A ROAD BLOCKS TO GET TO
GETTING THINGS FILED ARE YOU CAN
ALSO LET ME JUST ASK SO. LET'S
ASSUME THE PHYSICIAN IT MAYBE
YOU SAID THIS ADMITS THE
MISCONDUCT WHATEVER IT IS.
YOU'RE STILL REQUIRED TO RETAIN
AN EXPERT AND OBTAIN AN EXPERT
OPINION IN THAT CASE. CORRECT
WHAT HAPPENS IF IT SAFE A
PHYSICIAN IS CONVICTED OF
WHATEVER THE OFFENSES. THE FACTS
ARE NOT IN DISPUTE. THE CRIMINAL
COURT HAS A CHIU FORTY A
JUDICATA THE FACTS ARE YOU
REQUIRED TO SECURE AN EXPERT
OPINION. IN THE L. AND THE FACTS
RELATE DIRECTLY TO THE PRACTICE
OF MEDICINE LET'S ADD THAT. ARE
YOU STILL ARE YOU STILL REQUIRED
TO RETAIN THE SERVICES OF AN
EXPERT. YES OUR PROCESS WOULD
STILL REQUIRE THAT. THANK YOU.
IN THE PROCESS OF OBTAINING
CERTIFIED RECORDS WITH ACCURATE
PAGE COUNTS FOR EVERY CASE NOT
JUST THE ONES GOING TO HEARING
IS ALSO EXTREMELY TIME CONSUMING
THESE CASES INVOLVE MULTIPLE
PATIENTS MULTIPLE SETS OF
RECORDS. AND THAT REQUIREMENT TO
MAKE SURE THOSE PAGE NUMBERS
MATCH EXACTLY SOMETIMES THAT
CAUSES DELAYS. AND THEN THE
PROCESS OF PROCURING AN EXPERT
ESPECIALLY HARD TO FIND
SPECIALTIES CAN ADD SIGNIFICANT
TIME TO AN INVESTIGATION. OUR
CURRENT LAW DOES NOT TOLL THE
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WHEN THE
PHYSICIAN OF THE FACILITY
REFUSES TO PRODUCE RECORDS. THE
SUBPOENA ENFORCEMENT PROCESS IS
LENGTHY AND AT THE END THE ONLY
REMEDY IS FOR SECURE COURT JUDGE
TO ORDER THE PRODUCTION OF
RECORDS. THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO
PENALTY FOR THE DOCTOR OR
FACILITY FOR FAILING TO PRODUCE
THOSE RECORDS AND YEARS CAN BE
ADDED TO THE TIMELINE THIS IS AN
ORCHESTRATED EFFORT THAT HAPPENS
TO PREVENT US FROM GETTING THE
RECORDS TIMELY. SO THAT THE
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS RUNS OUT.
AND OUR CURRENT LAW DOES NOT
PREVENT DOCTORS FROM CONTACTING
PATIENTS AND SOLICITING THEM TO
RESEND THEIR SIGNED
AUTHORIZATION ALLOWING THE BOARD
TO OBTAIN THE RECORDS. AND
CURRENT LAW DOES NOT GIVE A TIME
FRAME FOR WHEN A PHYSICIAN HAS
TO COOPERATE WITH THE BOARD FOR
AN INTERVIEW AND AS WE DISCUSSED
BUT YOU KNOW THAT CAN TAKE MANY
MONTHS. UP TO A YEAR. SO THAT'S
MY PRESENTATION REGARDING THE
THREE CASE TYPES AND OUR PROCESS
AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS YOU MAY
HAVE. COLLEAGUES IN ASIA ANY
FURTHER QUESTIONS. SURE BERMAN
THANKS THE INFRASTRUCTURE- JUST
TAKE A KIND OF HIGH LEVEL
GENERAL QUESTION MY
UNDERSTANDING AND I THINK YOU
MENTIONED THIS IS THAT PRIOR TO
THE CREATION OF A NO YEAH I
DON'T THINK YOU MENTION THIS IN
YOUR IN YOUR OPEN BUT- PRIOR TO
THE CREATION OF H. Q. I YOU THE
MEDICAL BOARD EMPLOYED ITS OWN
INVESTIGATORS AND SOME HAVE
CALLED FOR THAT MODEL TO RETURN-
WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THAT HOUSING
THE INVESTIGATORS AT DCA OR DO
YOU BELIEVE THAT HOUSING
INVESTIGATORS A DCA IS A MORE
EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT OPTION.
WELL I THINK THAT YOU KNOW IT
DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHERE WE
SET. WHERE THE INVESTIGATOR SAID
WHAT MATTERS IS THAT WE HAVE THE
ABILITY TO TIMELY CONDUCT THE
INVESTIGATIONS. THAT WE HAVE- WE
NEED TEN TO FIFTEEN CASES MAX
PER INVESTIGATOR IF WE WANT TO
INVESTIGATE THESE CASES WITHIN
SIX MONTHS. AND WE NEED THE
ABILITY TO TIMELY GET RECORDS
AND THE ABILITY TO TIMELY GET
PHYSICIANS IN FOR INTERVIEWS. I
DON'T THINK IT REALLY MATTERS
WHETHER WE SIT AT D. C. A. R.
RESET MEDICAL BOARD. IT WOULD BE
THE SAME CHALLENGE. THANKS
SENATE MANY QUESTIONS THANK YOU
VERY VERY MUCH MYSTICAL SET WAS
VERY ENLIGHTENING YOU STICK
AROUND ONCE YOU- I HOPE BECAUSE
WE MAY HAVE SOME FURTHER
QUESTIONS AS WE AS WE MOVE
THROUGH THE PROCESS OF THANK YOU
SIR WELL THANK YOU THANK YOU NOW
LET'S TURN TO THE OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL PLAYS A VITAL
VITAL ROLE. IN MANY FACETS OF
OUR MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
OPERATION AND WE'RE PRIVILEGED
TO HAVE IN THE ALLEY WITH US THE
DIRECTOR OF OFFICE OF
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL THANK YOU FOR
JOINING US. HEY GOOD MORNING
SENATOR ROB ME NUMBERS FIND IN
THE ALLEY AND THE LEGISLATIVE
DIRECTOR BEATS ME OFFICE ON
BEHALF OF THE ITS NEW GENERAL
ASSIGNMENTS THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY TODAY I
FIND THESE TO BE WITH YOU THIS
MORNING RIGHT INFORMATION ABOUT
THE IMPORTANT WORK AT THE HEALTH
QUALITY SEXY IMAGES GENERAL'S
OFFICE IN. PLEASE ON BEHALF OF
OUR- THE MEDICAL BOARD AT. AND
VERY PLEASED WITH THE STAFF ARE
OFF FROM IN RESPONSE. AND THAT
BOARD HOW. FIRST IN FRONT THANKS
. IT CHENEY GENERAL'S HAS A VERY
. AND CLASS PARTNERSHIP WITH THE
MEDICAL BOARD AND COMPLETE SANTA
. IN OUR WORK YOUR CONTINUOUS
ENGAGE IN FAR CRY AND THIS.
PUBLIC TAX. AS TO HELP QUALITY
ENFORCEMENT PROCESS METAL BOARDS
SAID IN ADDITION IT'S OTHER CARE
OVERSIGHT EATEN. AND SEX WITHIN
OUR OFFICE MASSIVE CASES FOR
OTHER REGULATES BOARD. AND APART
SEEM RIGHT. IN THE HEALTH IN
FIRST THANKS FREEDOM BY LARGEST
IN 198% TOGETHER HI IN RIGHTS.
THE SEX OF THE HONOR IN
PRIVILEGE ADDRESS. QUARRY AND
OTHER OVERSIGHT AGENCIES
DEPARTMENTS CONSUMER AFFAIRS.
THE END OF THE PROCESS
RECOMMENDS SETTLEMENT SENDS
DEFAULTS FOR INJURY OR TAKE
MATTERS TO ME STATE FARM. WELL
WE WORK CLOSELY WITH OUR CLIENTS
CONTACT. WITH I'M SORRY WHAT WAS
THE RIGHT CONTACTS ALL OUT.
ALTERNATELY THE PROVINCE'S
ABOARD. I WOULD ROLL TO THE TOP
REJECT THE POST SETTLEMENT
PROPOSED DECISION FROM THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS. WE DO NOT PARTICIPATE
INVESTIGATION EXCEPT FOR A SMALL
AMOUNT OF JOINT INVESTIGATION.
OTHERWISE YOU DID INVESTED AND
HANDOFF MODEL. THE MISSION OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE IS
VIGOROUSLY PROTECT OUR HEALTH
WELFARE AND SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE
OF CALIFORNIA AN IMPORTANT.
RIGHT WHILE THE LEGAL SERVICES
THE STATE AGENCY CLIENT AND
REGULATORY BOARDS WHICH INCLUDES
THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
. I THINK YOU ARE WELL AWARE OUR
OFFICE HANDLES. AWESOME SAID
THIS IS A MEDICAL ONE. THE TRAIN
GENERAL'S HELP REINFORCEMENT
VACCINE RECEIVES IN REVIEWS
ABBOTT SELECTED BY INVESTIGATORS
FROM THE DC HOW PROPERTY
INVESTIGATIONS UNIT. IF
SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE IS FOUND IN
THE CASE FILE THE MATTER IS
ASSIGNED TO DEPUTY ATTORNEY
GENERAL JACKSON ACCUSATION
SIMILAR TO A COMPLAINT FOR AN
INDICTMENT. WHICH IS PRESENTED
TO THE MEDICAL BOARD FOR THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S SIGNATURE.
A HEARING BEFORE AN
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE WITH
THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS BEEN SCHEDULED.
SENTIMENT NEGOTIATIONS GENERALLY
BANS TAKE PLACE BETWEEN THE
ASSIGNED DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
AND LICENSEE COUNCIL. THE DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL PROPOSES
SETTLEMENT TERMS WHICH ARE
APPROVED BY THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE MEDICAL BOARD.
THE MAJORITY OF CASES RESOLVED
IT'S A STATE THREE STIPULATED
SETTLEMENT AND ARE GUIDED BY THE
MEDICAL BOARD'S DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES. IT'S NEVER
SETTLEMENT CAN BE REACHED THE
CASE FROM STATE STREET HEARING
RECEIVING A STRAIGHT AND LYFT
ADDS DRAFTED PROPOSED DECISION
BECAUSE THE MEDICAL BOARD FOR
ADOPTION. THE BOARD AS AN ENTITY
CAN ADOPT THE PROPOSED DECISION
AS A WRITTEN OR INCREASE OR
DECREASE THE DISCIPLINARY
PENALTY. IF THERE IS
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUSTAIN
A FILING TO SEE IF THE PLAN IN
THE CASE WILL BE REJECTED- OR
RETURNED FOR ADDITIONAL
INVESTIGATION INFORMATION. THIS
IS BECAUSE- STUDENTS OKAY FIVE
ATHLETES STANDS AGAINST
CALIFORNIA POSITIONS REQUIRED
CLEAR AND CONVINCING. YOU HAVE
REASONABLE CERTAINTY EVIDENTIARY
STANDARD GIVEN THAT THESE CASES
AND HAVE TO RECOGNIZE PROPERTY
RIGHT. ACCORDINGLY REMASTERS
STEVE WE RELIABLE NEED MISCIBLE
EVIDENCE THAT WOULD ALLOW THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IN
CONSULTATION WITH A HEALTH
PERSON SIXTEEN TO MAKE A REASONS
AND FAIR DETERMINATION OF
WHETHER CHARGES SHOULD BE FILED
. OUR DOJ ATTORNEYS REVIEW
EXTENSIVE AND COMPLEX MEDICAL
EVIDENCE DETERMINES THE BASIN
EGYPT SUPPORT THE FIVE
APPLICATION. ALLY AND THE
MEDICAL BOARD'S MEDICAL EXPERTS
WHO REVIEWED CASES AND DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A
DEPARTURE FROM THE STANDARD OF
CARE COULD BE EXCUSED PHYSICIAN
. CASON MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
CLAIMS ARE THE MOST COMPLEX.
TECHNICAL AND MATHEMATICS
LITIGATED ON BEHALF OF ANY DCA
BOARD. S. H. U. E. REJECT THE
CASE WE PROVIDE A LEGAL MAN I'D
SAY CLIENTS DETERMINE THE LEGAL
REASONS THE CASE NOT BE FILED.
THE TIMING FOR THE REVIEW
DECISIONS VERY AS THESE ARE
COMPLEX CASES THAT REQUIRE
EXTENSIVE LEGAL REVIEW AND
CONSIDERATION OF COMPLICATED
MEDICAL RECORDS EXPERT OPINIONS
AND OTHER EVIDENCE. BROUGH THERE
EVEN THE INVESTIGATIONS ARE
HANDED OFF TO ASK BY THE HEALTH
BODY INVESTIGATION UNIT AT DCA
SOMETIMES THESE FILES TAKE
LONGER TO WORK AT. IF THEY
TRANSPLANT WITH INSUFFICIENT
EVIDENCE TO PROSECUTE UNDER THE
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
STANDARD OF LAW. AS I MENTIONED
BEFORE HE FIRED PRIORS FRUIT HI
WE ARE INVESTING TO REASONABLE
CERTAINTY EVIDENTIARY STANDARD.
EVEN AT THESE CASES AND FACTOR
PHYSICIAN AND A SURGEON
CERTIFICATES WHICH IS A
RECOGNIZED PROPERTY RIGHT. AND
BEGINNING WITH FISCAL YEAR
SIXTEEN SEVENTEEN STATE STREET
GENERAL'S OFFICE PUBLISHES THE
ANNUAL REPORT ON ACCUSATIONS
PROSECUTED FOR DEPARTMENT OF
CONSUMER AFFAIRS FINE AGENCIES
CRISTINA IN THE BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS CODE. ZACKS NAY C.
THREE ONE ZERO POINT ZERO THOSE
REPORTS ON THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S WEBSITE H. O. A. T.
DOT CA DOT GEO BEE. AND REFLECTS
OUR ACCUSATION. ON BEHALF OF OUR
CHANGE THE MEDICAL BOARD. AND
WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE
OF THE HEARING AIDS IN PART TO
ALLOW OUR CLIENTS THE MEDICAL
BOARD OF CALIFORNIA RESIDENT AND
MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
THE BASE WITH THE LEGISLATURE AT
THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR. IN
DEFERENCE TO OUR CLIENT AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IS NOT
SIGNING ON ANY OF THOSE
PROPOSALS TODAY TO BE CLEAR
THOSE PROPOSALS PRESENTED ALL
ORIGINATED FROM THE MEDICAL
BOARD AND NOT D. A. J. IF ANY OF
THOSE PROPOSALS BECOME ON THE
FUTURE WE AT DOJ WILL. ENFORCE
PROVIDE THINK WE'LL TRY CLIENT
AGENCY AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO
THEIR MAY SEEM AN. OBJECT AS
THEIR ATTORNEY. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR- AND I ALSO TO MENTION THAT
I HAVE HERE ONE OF OUR EXPERT
IT'S MARNIE'S TRACKS THE WORKS
WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD. AND
OVERSEAS AND MANY OF THESE CASES
I'M HER NAME IS I'M SORRY A
CASTRO THE SENIOR ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THE CIVIL
LAW DIVISION. AND SEE IF SHE'S
HERE TO HELP ANSWER QUESTIONS.
GLORIA LET ME ASK A FEW LET ME
START OFF AND THEN TURN IT OVER
TO MY COLLEAGUES. BOB YOU YOU
HEARD SOME OF THE COMMENTS BY
THEM THE- THE MEDICAL BOARD. AND
DC REPRESENTATIVE RATHER HAVING
TO DO WITH INVESTIGATIONS AND
ONE OF MY QUESTIONS- IS THIS WHY
IS THERE A NEED FOR EXPERT
WITNESS PARTICIPATION. SEEMINGLY
IN EVERY CASE. REGARDLESS AND
YOU HEARD MY QUESTIONS ABOUT
CONVICTIONS YOU HEARD MY
QUESTIONS ABOUT CASES WHERE THE
PHYSICIAN HAD ADMITTED THE
MISCONDUCT CASES THAT DID NOT
INVOLVE- OF STANDARD OF CARE AND
WHAT I WOULD IN MY PRIVATE
PRACTICE WORLD I WOULD CALL
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE WHERE THERE
ARE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION AS TO
WHAT THE TREATMENT PROTOCOL IS
OR IS NOT WHY REQUIRE EXPERT
WITNESS TESTIMONY OR
AVAILABILITY. IN ALL OF THOSE
CASES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
QUESTION AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR
CONCERN COMPLETELY AND WITH
RESPECT TO SOME OF THE
DISCUSSION. SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASES ARE WHAT WHAT I GATHERED
THAT THEY ARE OFTEN A SIMPLE NOT
TO CALL IT SIMPLE BUT THEY ARE A
STRAIGHTFORWARD RAPE CASE OF IT
NO POSITION RATE THE PAY CENTRE
OFTEN VERY COMPLICATED CASES.
AND IN ALMOST ALL CASES THERE
ARE MEDICAL ISSUES THAT A CO
EXISTS. WITH THE SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT. EXAMPLE AS I TRIED
START A RELATIONSHIP WITH THEIR
PC WE NEED TO HAVE AN EXPERT TO
GET CONTACTS WHY THIS IS SUCH A
HORRIBLE SITUATION. AND IT'S A
VIOLATION OF MEDICAL ETHICS AND
WHY THE CASE WAS PARTICULARLY
VULNERABLE DUE TO THEIR
DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT. AND
EVEN IN CASES INVOLVING
SOMETHING THAT MAYBE IS. A MORE
BLATANT OFFENSE OR AN OUTRIGHT
RAPE CASE- WE MAY STILL NEED AN
EXPERT TO EXPLAIN LAST YEAR
INCLUDED VIOLATIONS OF THE
STANDARD OF CARE. FOR EXAMPLE
THE PHYSICIAN MAY HAVE ALSO BEEN
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT. AND WE DON'T
WANT TO IGNORE POSSIBLE MEDICAL
ISSUES THAT CO EXIST WITH THE
SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AND WE MAY
ALSO WANT TO HAVE BACK AT.
GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINE IF THE
FACT FINDER CONCLUDES THAT THE
VICTIM WAS NOT CREDIBLE CREDIBLE
ABOUT THE ACTUAL REPORTED
MISCONDUCT FOR ME LET ME ASK
ABOUT THE PSYCHIATRIST WHY WOULD
WE NEED A SECOND EXPERT. WITNESS
TO TELL US THAT A PSYCHIATRIST
WHO IS CURRENTLY TREATING A
PATIENT THEN DECIDES TO HAVE
SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THE
PATIENT HAS ENGAGED IN A
VIOLATION OF THE STANDARD OF
CONDUCT. WHY WOULD WE NEED AN
EXPERT TO EVALUATE THE PATIENCE. THE PATIENCE. PUT METAL STAY-
THE STRIKER. ENGAGE IN.
INTERCOURSE SEXUAL CONDUCT WITH
THE PATIENT DURING THE PERIOD OF
TIME THAT THE PSYCHIATRIST IS
TREATING THE PATIENT. FIVE BILL
IS NO LONG TIME SINCE I PRACTICE
LAW BUT I THOUGHT THERE WAS AN
INDEPENDENT VIOLATION OF A LAW
SOMEWHERE THE CIVIL CODE OR
SOMETHING ELSE IT. CREATED A
CAUSE OF ACTION FOR THAT SORT OF
ACTIVITY- IN ANY EVENT WHETHER
YOU'RE A LAWYER OR OF
PSYCHIATRIST OR SOMETHING ELSE.
I THINK IT TALKED ABOUT THE
SPOKE ABOUT USED TO SPEAK ABOUT
POSITIONS OF TRUST AND
CONFIDENCE IN SEVERAL. LET ME
ASK MY COLLEAGUE GLORIA HAS MORE
I'M NOT WHEN I WORKED ON THE
CASES HEY CAN YOU HEAR ME.
RICKLY GREAT THANK YOU FOR YOUR
QUESTION SENATOR ROTH- AS MY
COLLEAGUE AMY ALLEY HAS
TESTIFIED IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE
THERE ARE TWO SPECIFIC STATUTES
IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
SECTION SEVEN TWENTY SIX AND
SEVEN TWENTY NINE A CLOSE
READING OF BOTH- IS NECESSARY SO
THAT WE AVOID CONFLATING-
DIFFERENT THINGS THAT EXIST IN A
LOT OF PROTECT PROVISIONS AS
WELL- IN DEFENDING THEMSELVES
NOW MOVES TO THE SEX. ABUSE
CASES. I AGREE YOU SANK WHILE A
RAPE IS A RAPE THOSE ARE
CRIMINAL CASES THE ONES THAT
WEEKEND ARE ACTUALLY MUCH MORE
DIFFICULT THAN NOT. AND
ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE ARE TRYING
TO ALSO ACCOMPLISH AT THE SAME
TIME IS A PENAL CODE SECTION
TWENTY THREE BAIL CONDITION
RECOMMENDATION FROM AND STATE
AGENCY THAT REQUIRES AN EXPERT
OPINION. WHAT WE ALSO WANT TO DO
IS FILE AN INTERIM SUSPENSION
ORDER PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION ONE ONE FIVE TWO
NINE. THAT WILL REQUIRE AN
EXPERT OPINION. AND HONESTLY
GIVEN THE FACT THAT- I CAN
UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE THE
BACKGROUND EXPERIENCE. AND LONG
THE OTHER SIDE'S GOING TO HAVE
AN EXPERT AND WE WOULD LIKE AN
EXPERT TO MAKE SURE THAT. THE
JUDGE GETS TO HEAR IT FROM BOTH
SIDES. THERE ARE A LOT OF
ALLEGATIONS USUALLY- WITH
RESPECT TO GROOMING PATIENTS. M.
AS MY COLLEAGUE MITHALI ALREADY
TESTIFIED. WE WANT TO SURRENDER
WE WANT TO CHARGE EVERYTHING TO
THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW. AND
NOT LEAVE IT TO CHANCE WE TO
OBTAIN SURRENDERS AND IT'S
USUALLY BECAUSE OUR CASES ARE
FILED VERY STRONGLY. OUT OF THE
GATE. AND WE BELIEVE THAT THESE
ARE THE MOST CRITICAL CASES THAT
WE HANDLE FOR THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. SAID AT THE SAME
TIME BECAUSE OF THAT THEY'RE
HEAVILY DEFENDED. WE'RE
EXPECTING TO FIND AN EXPERT THAT
SAYS THAT'S OKAY THAT'S OKAY THE
PSYCHIATRIST MARRIED THE PATIENT
THE DAY AFTER HE RAPED HER. THE
ISSUE NO LONGER A PATIENT. SO
THAT'S THAT'S IN SHORT. LISTEN I
APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSE AND I
DON'T MEAN TO DENIGRATE THE
GREAT WORK THAT THE THAT YOU
MISS CASTRO IN THE OTHER
EMPLOYEES- OTHER- AGENTS AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PERFORM
EACH AND EVERY DAY FOR ALL THE
REST OF US I THINK WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO IS EXPLORE WAYS TO
MAKE THE MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT
WHICH IS WHAT WE IN THIS
COMMITTEE DEAL WITH- CLEARER.
MORE SPECIFIC AND TRY TO CREATE
AN ENVIRONMENT STATUTORILY THAT
IS MORE TIMELY MORE EFFICIENT-
AND THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF MY
ASKING THE QUESTION AND I'M JUST
WONDERING UNLESS WE DO UP PENAL
CODE TWENTY THREE IN EVERY CASE
BUT I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR AN
EXPERT PERHAPS THERE- I'M JUST
WONDERING IF WE IF WE JUST IF WE
JUST HAVE IT SET UP A SYSTEM
WHERE WE DO AN EXPERT JUSTIN
HAVE AN EXPERT OPINION READY TO
GO JUST IN CASE. THAT TENDS TO
DELAY THE PROCESS AND I GUESS
THAT'S MY QUESTION AND PERHAPS
AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS AND
AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN THE NEXT
YEAR WHEN WE BEGIN SUNSET REVIEW
YET AGAIN ON THE MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA WE CAN HAVE A
CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW WE CAN.
TAKING UP THE PROCESS NOT FROM
THE STANDPOINT OF YOUR WORK
RATHER. BUT FROM THIS THE
PROCESS ITSELF AND WHERE WE NEED
THINGS AND WHERE WE DON'T NEED
THINGS. TO TRY TO MAKE IT MORE
EFFICIENT AND CERTAINLY FASTER
FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE
CONSUMER. THE PATIENT THE
CLIENT. THE PEOPLE THAT TEND TO
BE MOST UPSET ABOUT THE FAILURE
TO MOVE QUICKLY. OF IN SOME OF
THESE CASES LET ME TURN TO
CENTER MAN I HAVE SOME MORE
QUESTIONS BUT I HAVE COLLEAGUES
WHO WERE MORE IMPORTANT AND I AM
SO. SENTIMENTS HAVE- NO COMMENT
THERE- HI- JUST WANT TO FOLLOW
UP ON ON CENTER ROTS CULTURE US
COMMENTS- YOU KNOW STRIKES ME
THAT THAT I AND I UNDERSTAND THE
REASON YOU WANT. TO HAVE EXPERT
TESTIMONY. IN ANY KIND OF
CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. TO PUSH
BACK AGAINST THE EXPERTS THAT
YOU'RE ANTICIPATING ON EITHER
SIDE BUT- THIS IS A IT IS A
PRIVILEGE TO HOLD A LICENSE IN
THE STATE I'M MINDFUL OF THE DUE
PROCESS CONCERNS THAT YOU MIGHT
FACE- BUT- YOU KNOW IT'S ABOUT
BALANCING AND HERE OBVIOUSLY
THE- THRESHOLD OF PROOF. MAY NOT
BE AS HIGH AS IN A CRIMINAL
PROCEEDING. AND I GUESS HEARING
THIS DISCUSSION BEING SOMEWHAT
NEW TO THIS DEBATE- IT STRIKES
ME THAT THAT WE DO HAVE TO
CONSIDER. PROTECTING PATIENTS-
AND THEIR CONCERNS AND THAT
MAYBE WE'VE OVER EMPHASIZED IN
THIS PROCESS THE RIGHTS OF
PHYSICIANS- VIS A VIS THE RIGHTS
OF VICTIMS- AND IT PERHAPS WE
SHOULD BE RECONSIDERING. WHETHER
AN EXPERT IS NECESSARY- ON A
SEPARATE NOTE I HAD A QUESTION
ABOUT. HOW YOU COORDINATE THESE
TYPES OF INVESTIGATIONS WITH THE
OTHER BODIES WE JUST HEARD FROM
H. YEAH YOU- I UNDERSTAND THE
MEDICAL BOARD HAS ITS OWN
INVESTIGATORY UNIT- IS THERE ANY
COORDINATION WITH N. B. C. H.
YEAH YOU OR ARE YOU GUYS ALL
SEPARATE. WHEN YOU DO THESE
INVESTIGATIONS. WE DEFER TO OUR
CLIENT TO ANSWER THAT SPECIFIC
QUESTION- B. AS THE VALLEY
MENTIONED WE RECEIVED CASES
COMPLETED. FROM OUR CLIENTS.
SEND ME I'M SORRY MAYBE I
UNDERSTAND THAT AND AGAIN I'M
NEW TO THIS DEBATE SO MAYBE YOU
CAN EXPLAIN THAT. AGAIN IN.
TERMS I MIGHT AS A NEWBIE TO
THIS UNDERSTAND- DOMESTICATION
BY MISS KATHLEEN NICHOLS STAFF
IS PERFORMED WITH THIRTEEN AND
WHEN THEY HAVE COMPLETED THEIR
INVESTIGATION THEY MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION TO OUR CLIENTS.
AND THIS IS WHY I THINK WHEN OUR
TIME COMES UP HERE THEY'LL
THEY'LL BE ABLE TO BE MORE
NUANCED WITH MY ANSWER BY THE
CLIENT REVIEWS WHAT IS
TRANSMITTED WAS A CLIMB MAYBE
THAT WOULD HELP THE MEDICAL
BOARD OKAY GOT YOU. AND THEN THE
MEDICAL BOARD SENT- DAY- REQUEST
THAT WE REVIEW LEGALLY- THE
COMPLETED INVESTIGATION I SEE SO
YOU DO THAT YOUR ENTERTAINMENT
WE ENGAGE THEM WITH WITH YOUR
CLIENT NBC. THAT IS CORRECT AND
WE REVIEW. EVERYTHING THAT MISS
NICHOLS THE STAFF HAS COMPILED
AS PEACE OFFICERS. AND YOU HEARD
HER PRESENTATION OF ALL THE
DIFFERENT STEPS BUT SHE
CONDUCTS. AND REVIEW IT FOR
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY UNDER THE
STANDARD. AND REVIEW WHAT
EXPERTS HAVE CITED. AND WE FILED
THE CASES THAT WE CAN FILE AND
DON'T FILE THE CASES THAT WE
CANNOT FILE AND WHAT ABOUT IN
THE CASE OF CONVICTIONS OR
ARRESTS- WHERE I UNDERSTAND
MAYBE I MISUNDERSTAND THAT THOSE
CASES ARE NOT NECESSARILY
INVESTIGATED THE SAME WAY BY
MISTER NICHOLS STAFF RIGHT SO IS
IT THE SAME PROCESS WHERE YOU.
INVESTIGATE MAKE THE
RECOMMENDATION THEN REFER IT TO
YOUR CLIENT. I WE DON'T
INVESTIGATE CASES HERE IN THE
HEALTH QUALITY ENFORCEMENT
SECTION- I'M SORRY. AND HELP
QUALITY INVESTIGATION UNIT
INVESTIGATES FIVE CASES THAT
HAVE BEEN CRIMINALLY CHARGED
RESULTING IN A CONVICTION. AND
THEN THEY WOULD COLLECT THE
CERTIFIED DOCUMENTS FROM THE
COURT- AND EFFECTIVELY SEND IT
TO OUR CLIENT THE MEDICAL BOARD
MEDICAL BOARD WOULD REVIEW IT
AND THEN SEND IT TO US WE'D OPEN
A CASE HERE REVIEW IT LEGALLY
AND- PROCEED UNDER TWO TO THREE
SIX OF THE BUSINESS THE
PROFESSION'S CODE IF THERE'S
SUBSTANTIAL RELATEDNESS BETWEEN
THE CONVICTION. OBTAINED AND THE
PRACTICE OF MEDICINE IT'S THE
SUBSTANTIAL RELATEDNESS I CARRY
OUT THAT IS DEMORALIZED THE
REGULATIONS OF THE MEDICAL BOARD
AS WELL AS IN CASE LAW THAT
USUALLY REQUIRES AN EXPERT TO
GIVE US THE MEDICAL OPINION A
SUBSTANTIAL RELATEDNESS
OBVIOUSLY JAY WALKING IS NOT
GOING TO BE SUBSTANTIAL RELATED
TO THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE BUT
PERHAPS DRIVING DOWN A HIGHWAY
AT EIGHTY MILES PER HOUR CAUSING
AN ACCIDENT LEAVING THE SCENE OF
THE CRIME AND RETURNING TO THE
SCENE OF THE CRIME TO RENDER AID
PRETENDING TO BE A PASSER BY. WE
WOULD ARGUE THAT THAT IS
SUBSTANTIAL LEAVE RELATED WE HAD
AN EXPERT IN THAT CASE YET THE
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE DISAGREED
AND HE WAS NOT A DOCTOR IN A
PARTICULAR CASE WAS NOT.
REQUIRED TO HANG UP HIS LICENSE
SO WE HAVE OTHER TOOLS IN OUR
BACK THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD-
INVESTIGATOR CASE- OR AT LEAST
HOW QUALITY INVESTIGATION UNIT.
WOULD INVESTIGATE THE CASE. AND
FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET INTO
EXPANSION OR- WHERE THERE WE
WOULD HAVE OUR EXPERTS SAY IT IS
SUBSTANTIALLY RELATED. TO THE
PRACTICE OF MEDICINE FOR
EXPLAINS THE REASONS. THAT WOULD
BE SORT OF A DISHONESTY MORAL
TURPITUDE. AND HOW YOU TREAT
PEDESTRIANS ON THE STREET HOW DO
YOU TREAT YOUR PATIENTS
ARGUMENT. BUT IT'S UP TO A JUDGE
. THANK YOU THAT HELPED BERMAN
THANK YOU SO IS SO I THINK WHAT
YOU'RE DESCRIBING NOW IS THE
HANDOFF MODEL THAT WE CURRENTLY
HAVE WHERE THE DC IT IS
INVESTIGATION AND THEN HANDS OFF
THEIR FINDINGS TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE- MY UNDERSTANDING IS
THAT YOU BAO FIVE YEARS AGO THAT
WE'D HAVE A DIFFERENT MODEL OF
VERTICAL ENFORCEMENT MODEL AND
THAT THAT SUNSET FIVE YEARS AGO
AND KIND OF TRANSITION TO THIS
HANDOUT MODEL DO YOU THINK THAT
SOME SORT OF VERTICAL
ENFORCEMENT MODEL SHOULD BE RE
CODIFIED OR- DO YOU THINK THE
CURRENT. KIND OF SYSTEM. IS
SUFFICIENTLY FLEXIBLE FOR THE
NEEDS OF. YOU AND YOUR TEAM AND
ALSO TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE
PATIENTS- IN THESE SITUATIONS. I
DEFER TO OUR CHIEF OF OFFICE OF
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS METHODOLOGY
TO. AFTER THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF SHE HEARD ME
BUT- OKAY. WELL REPEATED SURE.
SORRY IN A I DON'T KNOW THAT
WE'RE GOING TO ANSWER THAT
QUESTIONS TODAY DEGREE AND IT
WILL HAVE TO DEFRAUD IT BACK
DOWN IF YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON
WHETHER THAT'S SOMETHING WE YOU
KNOW WE BELIEVE W WANT TO BE
REINSTATED ANY POINT BUT WE WILL
GET BACK TO CHINA THAT BE GREAT
IF YOU JUST LET US KNOW WHAT YOU
THINK YOU KNOW THE PROS AND CONS
OF NOW WE'VE GOT FIVE YEARS OF
THIS NEW SYSTEM THE INOTES IT TO
TAKE A LOOK BACK AND SEE IF WE
THINK IT'S BETTER THAN THE OLD
SYSTEM OR IF. A HYBRID MAKES
MORE SENSE- WOULD LOVE YOUR
THOUGHTS. THANKS THANK YOU. LET
ME ASK YOU A COUPLE MORE
EFFECTIVE. MISCONSTRUE SERVE
RESPONSE TO ONE OF THE LAST
QUESTIONS GAVE RISE TO A
QUESTION FROM ME TALKING ABOUT
SUBSTANTIAL RELATEDNESS. HOW DID
WE GET TO THE POINT ON THE
MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT WERE. WHEN
A PHYSICIAN IS CONVICTED OF A
CRIME. WE HAVE TO SHOWS
SUBSTANTIAL RELATEDNESS IN ORDER
TO TAKE LICENSE ACTION. VERSUS
FOR THOSE OF US WHO ARE LAWYERS
AS I RECALL LOOKING AT OUR
PRACTICE ACT CONVICTION OF A
FELONY CRIME A BILL INVOLVING
CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE- IS
SPECIFICALLY LISTED AS A BASIS
FOR. SERIOUS DISCIPLINARY ACTION
INCLUDING LICENSE REVOCATION OR
SUSPENSION AS I RECALL THE
LANGUAGE. WHAT ACCOUNTS FOR THE
DIFFERENCES THERE'S SOMETHING
DIFFERENT ABOUT PHYSICIANS AND
LAWYERS AND OTHER LICENSED
PROFESSIONALS. AND WHAT WOULD
HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LEGISLATIVE
HISTORY- YOUR HONOR- THE STATUTE
. THANK YOU FOR THE PROMOTIONS
SECTION WAS CANCER THANK YOU FOR
THE PROMOTION BUT THAT'S OKAY
I'M OF ONE YET TO TWO TIMES A
DAY YOU HEAR. HONORABLE CHAIR
HONORABLE CAN'T- BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION TWO
THREE THREE SIX IS WHAT REQUIRES
SUBSTANTIAL RELATEDNESS TO THE
QUALIFICATIONS FUNCTIONS AND
DUTIES OF THE POSITION INSERT.
AND SURGEON IN ORDER TO
CONSTITUTE UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT WITHIN THE MEANING OF
THE CHAPTER. THE RECORD OF
CONVICTION CHAU ONLY BE
CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE OF THE FACT
THAT THE CONVICTION OCCURRED
THAT LEADS US TO STILL ARGUE.
ALL THOSE REASONS I CANNOT.
EXAMPLE TO HEAD AND UN. AND I
WAS ADDED- LAST AMENDED IN
NINETEEN NINETY FOUR. DESERTO
DANCERS IT'S LEGISLATIVE AND IS
IT ALSO MEAN THAT YOU THAT THE
FAX IT- EDUCATED IN THE
UNDERLYING CRIMINAL CASE HAVE TO
BE RE LITIGATED IN THE
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING. NOW
SO THE IF IN FACT THERE IS A
CONVICTION THE FACTSTHAT LED TO
THAT CONVICTION ARE ADMITTED AS
A MATTER OF FACT IN ANY
SUBSEQUENT ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDING INVOLVING THE
PHYSICIAN YES PERFECT LET ME
MOVE TO PC TWENTY THREE AND I
THINK I AS I RECALL AS MS
NICHOLAS MILTON IS THE CLOSEST
QUESTION ABOUT. STATISTICS DO
YOU HAVE ANY STATISTICS AS TO
THE- I WILL CALL IT A WIN LOSS
RATIO BUT THE DEGREE OF SUCCESS
OR LACK OF SUCCESS IN SECURING.
OF PENAL CODE TWENTY THREE
RELIEF. IN CASES WHERE YOU
PURSUE IT. I DO NOT OUR CLIENT
DOES PUBLISH ANNUAL REPORTS AND
I WOULD DEFER TO MY CLIENT OKAY
. WITH THE LET ME MOVE ON TO-
SOMETHING THAT IS THAT WAS OF
CONCERN TO BE AT AN EARLIER
HEARING AND THAT IS- EVERYBODY
SEEMS TO AGREE THAT THE
STIPULATED SETTLEMENTS. TEND TO
BE ABOUT 80% OF THE CASES. AT
THE MEDICAL BOARD WHEN WE HAVE
DISCIPLINARY CASES ABOUT 8083%
GIVER TAKER. RESULT IN
STIPULATED SETTLEMENTS AT LEAST
THAT'S WAS CASTRO THAT'S A
STATISTIC THAT I SAW. AND HAVE
HEARD- CAN YOU TELL ME. WHY
THERE APPEARED TO HAVE BEEN
SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURES FROM THE
MEDICAL BOARD'S PUBLISHED
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINES IN THOSE
SETTLEMENT CASES. IF I'M IF I
MAY ASK I DON'T HAVE WHATEVER
DATA YOU ARE LOOKING AT TWO THE
STAFF THE DEVIATIONS FROM
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINES WITH THE
LET ME LOOK LET ME ASK IT
ANOTHER WAY IT'S NOT THIS IS NOT
OF. KNOW YOUR BIBLE. COURSE DO
YOU WHEN YOU WHEN THE DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL. IS INVOLVED IN
A MEDICL DISCIPLINARY CASE DO
YOU CONSIDER THE MEDICAL BOARD'S
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINES. IN YOUR
IN FORMULATING YOUR
RECOMMENDATION FOR ACTION. YES
WE DO AND MAY OF TWENTY TWENTY
ONE AND HEALTH COUNCIL FROM THE
MEDICAL BOARD KERRY WEBER
PRESENTED AGENDA ITEM THIRTEEN-
IN A VERY EXCELLENT PRESENTATION
EXPLAINING. ALL THE ANSWERS TO
THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE
SENATOR ROTH ON DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES HOW THEY ARE APPLIED.
HOW THEY ARE INTERPRETED. AND
WHERE THEY COME INTO PLAY AND
IT'S A STEP BY STEP PROCESS.
THAT'S ONE WAY TO BE AT THE
ACCUSATION LEVEL AS THE FULL
PANOPLY OF CHARGES. THAT SUSTAIN
CERTAIN LEVELS OF DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES AND RANGERS. AND AT
THE CONCLUSION OF IT A
RECOMMENDATION IS MADE. BY THE
JUDGE WHO ALSO USES THE FEDERAL
GUIDELINES TO EFFECTUATE THE
PROPOSED ORDER ADDED TO THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AND
OFFERING UP THE STIPULATION. ON
TO SETTLE THE MATTER AND IT
AUTOMATICALLY UP TO THE BOARD
MEMBERS TO DECIDE. WHAT TO DO
AND MRS- A DISCUSSION ABOUT
DEVIATING SO WE DEVIATE UP. THE
CHARGE MORE- BEGETS RENDERS. WE
CHARGE RIGHT ON THE RIGHT IN THE
MIDDLE AND TO THE EXTENT. THE
OPPOSING COUNSEL- EDITOR AND
EXPERT OPINION AND MEDICATION
OUT EVIDENCE AND REHABILITATION
EVIDENCE COMES INTO PLAY BECAUSE
PUBLIC PROTECTION AND- IT IS THE
GOAL OF THE MEDICAL BOARD WHILE
ALSO CONSIDERING REHABILITATION
AS A PRIORITY WE'RE NOT
INCONSISTENT. THEY WOULD LIKE TO
KEEP THE DOCTOR AND PRACTICE.
COUNTY SO I DEFER TO OUR CLIENTS
AND TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION BUT
IT'S A REALLY GREAT PRESENTATION
I MISS WEBER GAVE. MAY TWENTY
TWENTY ONE AGENDA ITEM THIRTEEN
. WHAT EXPLAINS THE PROBABLY
WAS- PUBLICLY. WHAT IS THIS WHAT
WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE CASES
THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
FINDS ITSELF INVOLVED WITH
ACTUALLY PROCEED TO TRIAL BEFORE
AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE. I
WOULD HAVE TO REFER YOU TO OUR
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
SECTION THREE ONE TWO POINT TWO
REPORT WHICH IS AVAILABLE
ONLINE. SO IN A NUTSHELL ABOUT
EIGHTEEN TO TWENTY POINT 1% OF
OUR CASES MAY GO TO HEARING. IF
WE START ALL A BUNCH BY DEFAULT
AS WELL. AND WE STIPULATE
OTHERS- BUT AGAIN ATTORNEY
GENERAL IS NOT THE OLD CEMENT
OUR PICTURE OF ANY OF US IT IS
THE BOARD. AND THE BOARD CAN DO
ANY NUMBER OF THINGS. SO- BEFORE
I GET TO THE EVIDENCE RESTATED I
DO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THAT
BRIEFLY. WE HAVE. HAD
CONVERSATIONS INSIDERS COMMITTEE
IT OUTSIDE THIS COMMITTEE
SEPARATELY ABOUT. THE COST OF.
THE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS AT THE
MEDICAL BOARD. AND THAT INVOLVES
A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS SOME
OF WHICH YOU ARE INVOLVED IN
PERHAPS A SMALL AMOUNT OTHERS
YOU WERE NOT. BUT INSIDE THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WITH
REGARD TO THE MEDICAL BOARD
OPERATION AND THE AND THE
ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. HOW HOW ARE. LEGAL SERVICES THE EXTENT OF
LEGAL SERVICES DETERMINED AND BY
THAT I GUESS I'M ASKING IS THERE
SOME SORT OF UTILIZATION REVIEW
PROCESS. THAT IS APPLIED. THAT'S
THE QUESTION AND THEN LET ME
THEN SUPPLEMENT THE QUESTION
WITH THE STATEMENT I COME FROM
PRIVATE PRACTICE AND I HAVE
CLIENTS TO. AND THE LARGER
CLIENTS TYPICALLY INSISTED ON A
LITIGATION PLAN WHETHER YOUR
DEFENSE SO YOU'RE ON THE ON THE
PLANE OF SIDE IN THE CIVIL AND
CIVIL CASES. M. THEY WANTED TO
KNOW WHAT WAS PROPOSED TO BE
DONE HOW MUCH IT WAS GOING TO
COST AND THERE WERE DECISION
POINTS ALONG THE WAY. THAT THE
CLIENT INSISTED ON PARTICIPATING
IN TO DETERMINE. THE UILITY OF
MOVING FORWARD BALANCING DOING A
COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TO
DETERMINE WHETHER IT WAS WORTH
PURSUING THE MATTER FURTHER OR
OR WHETHER SETTLEMENT OR SOME
OTHER RESOLUTION WAS MORE
APPROPRIATE. IS THAT MODEL
APPLIED. IN THE DOJ MEDICAL
BOARD CONSTRUCT. MISTER SMITH
GALLAGHER WILL BE ANSWERING THAT
QUESTION BUT BASS COST RECOVERY
THAT IS NOT AN ISSUE HELLO THIS
IS NOT COST RECOVERY THIS IS
THIS IS THE MEDICAL BOARD
CONTROL OVER THE BILL THAT IT
ULTIMATELY GETS FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR LEGAL
SERVICES AND SO MY QUESTION IS.
WHAT IMPACT ANY INPUT DOES THE
MEDICAL BOARD HAVE IN IN WHAT
FORMAT AND AT WHAT POINT THANK
YOU WITH RESPECT TO INDIVIDUAL
CASES. THANK YOU SENATOR- I'LL
TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE-
UTILIZATION OVERSIGHT. AND DOJ
OPERATE EFFICIENTLY TO HANDLE
ALL OF THE LEGAL WORK
TRANSMITTED TO OUR OFFICE REALLY
WILL REVIEW. EVERY MONTH D. O.
J. ACCOUNTS THANK THE CLIENT AN
ITEMIZED BILL FOR ALL LEGAL
SERVICES CHARGED FOR THE PRIOR
MONTH. THAT REPORT DESCRIBES
EVERY CASE SOUTH ROAD IN BILLING
NARRATED ANSWERED BY OUR LGAL
STAFF. THE MEDICAL BOARD IS A
GOOD STEWARD AND THE BILLINGS
MADE TO THESE MATTERS BY OUR
OFFICE. THEY MEET WITH AS
FREQUENTLY I'M IN REVIEW OTHER
INFORMATION THAT AT EIGHT AM IN
REAL TIME ON THE STATUS OF THE
CASE. AND ALSO THE EXPENDITURES
DATE. NOW THAT THE MEDICAL BOARD
HAS BEEN GIVEN AUTHORITY TO
COLLECTED COSTS IN INVESTIGATION
AND PROSECUTIONFRIEND CHARGED
PHYSICIANS. AND THERE'S
BUILDINGS ARE ALSO TRANSPARENCY
AND ALSO PART OF ANY STIPULATED
SETTLEMENT. AND THE
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AS WE MOVE
FORWARD TO SIX FAN IN OBTAINING
THESE COSTS FROM THE OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS. AND
ADDS NOTED WE PUBLICLY REPORT ON
AN ANNUAL BASIS ON ALL OF THE
ACCUSATIONS WHERE FOR THE
MEDICAL BOARD IN MY CLIENT
REPORTS. ON THE DISCIPLINARY OUT
AND SUCCEED IN OUR ANNUAL
REPORT. WHERE IS MY QUESTION.
YOU KNOW AND COST FOR RESERVE IS
A VERY IMPORTANT TOOL IT WAS
RATHER CONTROVERSIAL WE'LL SEE
HOW IT WORKS OUT BUT- COST
RECOVERY MEANS THAT SOME SOME
OTHER PERSON IN THIS K. OR
PERSONS IN THIS CASE
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE I
ASSUME OR PERHAPS. A SUPERIOR
COURT JUDGE IF YOU CAN FIGURE A
WAY TO GET THERE IS GOING TO
DETERMINE WHETHER THE LEGAL FEES
CHARGED A REASONABLE UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES AND THEN MAKE A.
DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER THE
PHYSICIAN. OR SHOULD BE ORDERED
TO PAY. SO THERE'S A REASON.
TEST OF SOME POINT I'M JUST
TRYING TO OUT HOW MUCH
INVOLVEMENT THE MEDICAL BOARD
HAS OR HOW MUCH CONVERSATION
WITHOUT GETTING INTO SPECIFIC
CASES. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE IN THE MEDICAL BOARD HAVE
IN DETERMINING THE NATURE AND
EXTENT OF LEGAL SERVICES TO BE
APPLIED TO A PARTICULAR CASE.
GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE CASE
SOME MORE SEVERE SOME LESS
SEVERE. IS THERE OF IS THERE
OTHER THAN GETTING A FILE DOING
THE WORK SENDING A BILL GETTING
A CHECK AND HOPEFULLY AT THE END
GETTING SOME COST RECOVERY. IS
THERE A MORE FORMAL PROCESS TO
TAKE A LOOK AT EACH CASE AND SAY
THIS CASE IS A PRETTY SMALL CASE
IT'S WORTH. OF SOME ATTORNEY
INVOLVEMENT BUT NOT A LOT SO
LET'S LET'S DO THIS AND SEE
WHERE WE GO. AS OPPOSED TO THE
MORE SERIOUS CASE WHERE WE SAY
WE'VE GOT TO GO TO THE WALL
WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GO TO
TRIAL BECAUSE THE PHYSICIANS
PROBABLY NOT GOING TO SETTLE.
AND WE NEED TO GO WE NEED TO GET
ALL OF OUR EXPERTS WE NEED TO BE
FULLY PREPARED WE NEED TO MOVE
FORWARD IS THAT A FAIR QUESTION
. I'LL TRY TO ANSWER WHAT I
THINK YOU'RE GETTING OUT. AND
THAT IS THAT WE HAVE A CLOSE AND
COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIP. WITH
EVERYONE AT THE MEDICAL BOARD.
WHEN WE REACH A CRITICAL TREE.
BRANCH OFF. WHERE WE COULD GO
ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. WE ARE
VERY TRANSPARENT WITH OUR CLIENT
ON YES WE CAN DO THAT AND THIS
IS HOW MANY HOURS NOT ME TAKE.
OR WE COULD DO THIS OTHER THING.
AND PUBLIC SAFETY. TRANSFERRING
OTHER CONSIDERATION ON HOW MUCH
THINGS ARE GOING TO COST. THE
GOVERNMENT- IF WE NEED TO GET A
REVOCATION OR SURRENDER. ON
SOMEONE. WE ARE VERY MOTIVATED-
TO DO THAT IT DOESN'T. PUBLIC
THE WORK OF PUBLIC PROTECTION.
IS NOT ANALOGOUS TO. MANY OTHER
THINGS THAT WE DO IN OUR SOCIETY
. I AM CONTINUOUSLY ENGAGED ON A
DAILY SOMETIMES VEN HOURLY
BASIS ON CASES INVOLVING OUR
TEAM. AND WEBER TO DISCUSSING
THE WORK THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE
PUTTING INTO A CASE. IT IS WITH
THE UNDERSTANDING THAT YEAH THIS
IS GOING TO BE BUILT TO OUR
CLIENT. WE'RE VERY GOOD STEWARDS
OF OUR TIME AND THE FACT THAT
THE LEGISLATURE CREATED A
BOUTIQUE LAW FIRM WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OF HIGHLY
SPECIALIZED STAFF. WHOSE
CASELOADS ARE VERY LARGE BUT ARE
MOSTLY COMPRISED OF MEDICAL FOR
CASES. IN AND OF ITSELF IS AN
EFFICIENCY BUILT INTO THE
PROCESS. WE ONLY HIRE. A PAST
EMPLOYERS THAT HAVE MEDICAL
MALPRACTICE BACKGROUND. SO IN
SHORT BECAUSE THEY'RE EXPERTS IN
BECAUSE THEY ARE MOTIVATED
BECAUSE THEY HAVE THIS
EXPERIENCE. I BELIEVE THAT WE
CAN PERFORM ALL THE STOCKS THAT
HALF AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE
. VIEW THE BUILDINGS
MISPERCEPTION THE SERVER HASTY
MYSTERONS. EVERYONE AT THE
MEDICAL BOARD STAFF IT'S HIGHLY
COGNISANT OF HOW MUCH THINGS
COST. I BELIEVE THAT- ATTORNEY
GENERAL BILLING RATE. IS THE
SAME IF I'M WORKING THE CASE
WITH THIRTY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
OR IF SOMEONE WHO JUST JOINED
THE OFFICE. A YEAR AGO IF THE
SAME BILLING RATE. A CAPSULE
EIGHT EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN
THAT WE- BUT TOGETHER
SECRETARIES PHOTOCOPYING AND
ALBA. AND I'M I'M NOT BEING
CRITICAL WORK I WANT TO BE CLEAR
I'M NOT BEING CRITICAL OF THE
WORK OF THE DEPARTMENT JUSTICE
AND IN PARTICULAR YOU'RE WORKING
AS CASTRO WITH THE WORK OF YOUR
TEAM- AND I CERTAINLY AGREE-
WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC
SAFETY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
CONSUMER PROTECTION- THAT ISSUE
IS PARAMOUNT OVER EVERYTHING
ELSE. THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT
THOUGH THAN THE TYPICAL WORK
THAT I THINK OTHER AS OTHER
BRANCHES AND DIVISIONS OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE FOR
INVOLVED IN WHERE YOU'RE WORKING
DIRECTLY FOR BUT STATE AGENCIES
- AND YOU SAID THE DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES A BILL. AND
THE BILLS PAID FOR OUT OF THE
GENERAL FUND IN THIS CASE YOUR
BILL IS PAID. ENTIRELY BY THE
LICENSEES OF THE MEDICAL BOARD
OF THE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIANS SO AND YOU'RE IN
AND IT'S NOT THE ONLY BOARD TO
THE FORCE. THIS IS THE SUPPLIES
TO. AND SO I WAS JUST ASKING TO
SEE IF GIVEN THAT. IF WE SET UP.
OF WHAT I WOULD CALL CALL
UTILIZATION REVIEW PROCESS IF WE
WERE IN THE HEALTHCARE ARENA- ON
ON LEGAL SERVICES BUT I I'M- I
TAKE YOUR ANSWER AND WE'LL HAVE
TO. WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT WE DO
WITH THAT AS WE MOVE WE MOVE
THROUGH THIS PROCESS WHETHER WE
GET SOME. GENERAL FUND SUPPORT
FOR SOME OF THESE DCA BOARDS
BUREAUS IN. AND THE LIKE OR
WHETHER WE THEY CONTINUE TO BE
FULLY SUPPORTED BY LICENSEES I
THINK KIM. YOU DO A GREAT JOB
AND KEEP DOING A GREAT JOB
DON'T. TAKE ANY OF MY COMMENTS
AS A CRITICAL ONE LAST NUMBER
EIGHT AND NINE TAKEN ONE LAST
QUESTION BEFORE WE MOVED TO THE
NEXT PANEL BECAUSE IT DIRECTLY
RELATES TO THE- TO THE NEXT
PANEL. AND THAT IS THE USE OF
THE CLEAR AND CONVINCING
EVIDENCE STANDARD THAT WAS
RIPPED REFERENCED- EARLIER AND-
I THINK- I BELIEVE IT WAS MISS
ELLIE'S COMMENTS MAYBE WISHERS
MISS CASTRO. AND IN IN LOOKING
AT THIS EVENT YOUR CASE IN YOUR
MORE MUCH MORE FAMILIAR WITH
THESE CASES THAT I AM BECAUSE
I'M A LITTLE OUTOF MY SANDBOX.
IT APPEARS IS THIS AS THE- IT
APPEARS THAT THE CURRENT
CONVINCING EVIDENCE STANDARD. IS
AT LEAST IN THE COURT'S VIEW TO
BE APPLIED IN CASES WHERE THERE
IS A REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF
A PHYSICIAN'S LICENSE WHERE THE
PHYSICIANS ABILITY TO PRACTICE
MEDICINE. IN THIS CASE PRACTICE
THE PROFESSION EARN A LIVING
WILL BE INTERRUPTED. AND THAT'S
THE STANDARD THAT APPEARS TO BE
UTILIZED IN THE INVESTIGATION
CERTAINLY AND I GUESS DECISIONS
AS TO WHETHER OR NOT TO
PROSECUTE CASES SHOULD THAT BE
THE STANDARD. IN CASES THAT
CLEARLY DO NOT APPEAR TO RISE TO
THE LEVEL OF REVOCATION OR
SUSPENSION. WHO WANTS TO TAKE
THAT ALL UP I'LL START I'LL
TATE MEET WE'VE BOTH POP BOTH
FOLLOW THE LAW BASED ON WHATEVER
YOU KNOW WHERE. BOB WISE WE'RE
GOING TO FOLLOW THAT IN MAKING
ANY DECISIONS AND IN WORKING
THESE CASES SO. AGAIN WE HAVEN'T
AND WE AREN'T REALLY OPINING ON
ANY OF THE CURRENT PROPOSALS
THAT- THAT ARE BEFORE US TODAY
TO. INTENSELY CHANGE THE
STANDARD- SIGN A LITTLE. I'M
WARY OF TALKING ANY SPECIFICS ON
WHETHER STANDARDS. JAMES WITH
RESPECTED. I THE CASE THAT WELL
ABOVE ABOUT WITH WOULD CHANGE
THE STANDARD TO REBUTTAL.
HUNDREDS THE EVIDENCE IN IN
CERTAIN CASES CERTAIN LESS
SERIOUS CASES. WITH THAT CHANGE
THE WAY THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE HANDLES THE CASE IN
TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME
SPENT- AND OTHER ACTIVITY IF
THAT'S A FAIR QUESTION. WAS
CASTRO YEAH I WOULD I WOULD
SUBMIT THE STILL NEED THE
EVIDENCE FOR THE 51% STANDARD AS
MUCH AS WE NEED IT FOR THE 80%
STANDARD. IT'S A DIFFICULT
QUESTION. TO ANSWER ONLY BECAUSE
I WANT TO BE DEFERENTIAL TO THE
EXISTING CASE LAW BUT THAT WHICH
IS AT INTERSPERSES BOARD OF
MEDICAL QUALITY INSURANCE BUT
THE CASE FROM NINETEEN EIGHTY
TWO RIGHT I HAVE ALREADY BUT BUT
IT ONLY RELATES TO. SIT ONLY
RECOUP RELATES TO REVOCATION AND
SUSPENSION. WELL IT ACTUALLY
YEAH I UNDERSTAND NOW. IT
DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THREE CASES
WHERE THE DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES CALL FOR A PUBLIC
REPRIMAND FOR EXAMPLE. BOROUGHS
CITING FOSSIL ELSE THAT'S LESS
THAN REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION. I
DID NOT READ LIKE THAT- BY
DEFENSE COUNSEL AND- BUT WE CAN
CLARIFY THAT ARE NOT BY US. WELL
AS WE CAN I WOULD LIKE TO SAY
THAT WHEN WE CHARGE OUR CASES-
PRAYER WILL ALWAYS STAY.
REVOCATION ALL THE WAY DOWN TO
PROBATION SO IN THE PRAYER
ITSELF. WE DON'T KNOW UP TO DATE
WITH RESPECTFULLY WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND
DISCOVERY WE MIGHT ADD CHARGES.
WE MAY FIND OUT OTHER THINGS
THAT CAUSE US TO. BELIEVE IT TO
SURRENDER CASE AND IT'S NOT A
POPULAR ANSWER TO SAY THAT. IT
DEPENDS ON THE CASE AND CASES
EVOLVED OR DEVOLVED- SO I
UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING
FROM TRYING TO ASSESS WHETHER OR
NOT IT'S A RELOCATION CASE OR
NOT. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S
TOO EARLY TO STAY EVEN UP THE
FILING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET
FROM THE OTHER SIDE. WHAT YOU
YOU WILL DO ALL THE WORK IN AN
ORGANIZATION THAT DOES CRIMINAL
WORK. AND I'VE NEVER DONE IT.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ACCEPT IN THE
MILITARY BUT IT SEEMS TO ME
THAT- THAT'S THE EQUIVALENT IN
THIS TO BE A REVOCATION FOR A
POSITION AS A CAPITAL. OFFENSE
YOU LOSE YOUR RIGHT TO PRACTICE
INTERNAL EVAN. SO THAT WOULD BE
THE ALMOST THE EQUIVALENT OF
INVESTIGATING EVERY EVERY
CRIMINAL CASE IS A CAPITAL CASE
. IN TERMS OF RETENTION OF
EXPERTS COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE-
AND I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE
RIGHT APPROACH BUT I'M I'M
CERTAINLY GOING TO DEFER TO THE
EXPERTS AND THAT INCLUDES YOU.
MS CASTRO IN HIS ALLEY AND I SEE
WE HAVE SOME MEDICAL BOARD FOLKS
ON THE LINE SO WE GET TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD PANEL MAYBE WE CAN
HAVE A FURTHER CONVERSATION AND
YOU ALL CAN JUMP IN. AND HELP ME
UNDERSTAND THIS BECAUSE IT IT
SOUNDS TO ME LIKE. WE DO ALL A
LOT OF EXTRA INVESTIGATION WORK
. IN ORDER TO MEET A CLEAR AND
CONVINCING STANDARD WHEN
STATISTICS PROBABLY INDICATE
SHOULD INDICATE THAT AT LEAST IN
A CERTAIN PROPORTION OF THOSE
CASES. THE RESULT IS NEVER GOING
TO RISE TO THE LEVEL. WHERE
REVOCATION AND SUSPENSION OR THE
OUTCOME AND CLEAR AND CONVINCING
EVIDENCE IS THE STANDARD. RIGHT
AIR CORRECTIVE DEFERRED TMS LAB-
IS EXCELLENT PRESENTATION MAY
TWENTY TWENTY ONE AND HERE TODAY
WILL HELP TO ELIMINATE. BUT THE
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINES OFFER
THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM PENALTY.
AND DEPENDING ON WHAT IS CHARGED
AND WE DON'T LIKE TO ONLY CHARGE
ONE THING. AID THE PROVERBIAL
EGGS IN ONE BASKET FLORIO. OKAY
WELL IF YOU LIKE YEAH RICHARD
RUSSIAN COUNTER HERE- LITERACY
CURRICULUM ANY QUESTIONS AND
THEN WE'LL MOVE THE EXPELLED
SERMONS. HI OUT I DISMISS
NICKLES- HAD A SERIES OF
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR US ON
REDUCING ROAD BLOCKS TO- SOME OF
THE- SUSPENSIONS AND OTHER
ACTIONS WITH RESPECT TO
PHYSICIANS- THAT HAD ALLEGEDLY
ENGAGED IN MISCONDUCT AND ONE OF
THEM WHAT WAS RETAINING EXPERTS
I THINK WE HEARD YOUR VIEWS ON
THAT. BUT THERE ARE FEW OTHER
RECOMMENDATIONS HE HAD I WAS
JUST CURIOUS ON YOUR THOUGHTS ON
THESE- ONEOF THEM WAS- THE
CURRENT LAW DOES NOT PULL THE
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS WHEN THE
PHYSICIAN OR FACILITY REFUSES TO
PRODUCE RECORDS- AND I GUESS THE
SUGGESTION HERE IS CHANGING
THAT. PROCESS SPENT REVISING
SCHEDULE IMITATIONS IF THE IF
THAT RECORD PRODUCTION AND
HAPPEN. I SAYS ONE ANOTHER ONE
IS THAT CURRENT LAW DOES NOT
PREVENT DOCTORS FROM CONTACTING
PATIENTS AND SOLICITING THEM TO
RESCIND THEIR SIGNED
AUTHORIZATION- AND THEN THE
THIRD IS CURRENT LAW DOES NOT
GIVE A TIME FRAME FOR WHEN A
PHYSICIAN HAS TO COOPERATE WITH
THE BOARD OR PRESENT WITH OTHER
AUTHORITIES FOR AN INTERVIEW- IT
DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON
THESE ROAD BLOCKS AND- I GUESS
THE PRESUMPTION THAT WE SHOULD
CHANGE THEM. AND I DON'T THINK
THAT CENTER WE CAN. TODAY I
WOULD WANT TO GET BACK WITH
THIRTEEN AND FIND OUT I WOULDN'T
WANT TO GET AHEAD OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL ON ANY OF
THESE. POLICY CHANGES. BUT WE'RE
HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU LATER
HAVE IT YOU KNOW FOLLOW UP
MEETING WE CAN TRY TO. COLLECT
MORE INFO AND SEE WHAT HIS
OPINION IS ON SOME OF THOSE
THINGS AS WELL. THANK YOU I'M
NOT THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE
BUT I WOULD BE CERTAINLY
INTERESTED AS A MEMBER OF IT AND
IN YOUR THOUGHTS ON THOSE
SUGGESTIONS DEFINITELY WE WILL
REACH BACK OUT. HERE THANK YOU.
HAILING FURTHER WELL I WANT TO
THANK YOU ALL FOR PARTICIPATING
THOSE OF YOU FROM THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE HOPEFULLY YOU
CAN. STICK AROUND BECAUSE WE MAY
NEED TO. TRY TO GET SOME INPUT
FROM YOU DEPENDING ON WHAT
HAPPENS IN THE NEXT SERIES OF
PANELS SO. LET'S MOVE NOW TO-
THE SPECIFIC PROPOSALS FROM THE
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
WE'RE JOINED BY MISS CHRISTINA
LAWSON THE BOARD PRESIDENT OF
DISTINGUISHED LAWYER- WILLIAM
PACIFICA BOARD EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR IN VARIOUS SPORTS STAFF
INCLUDING IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING
JENNA JONES CHIEF OF ENFORCEMENT
KARRIE WEBB STAFF COUNCIL. WHOSE
NAME HAS BEEN MENTIONED SEVERAL
TIMES WITH DISTINCTION IN THE
PROBE PANEL. AND I UNDERSTAND
THAT ADDITIONAL MEDICAL BOARD
STAFF ARE AVAILABLE IF THERE ARE
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
SO. WHY DON'T WE MOVE FORWARD.
MS LAWSON IS IT YOU. YES GOOD
MORNING- CHAIRMAN ROTH AS
SENATORS ALSO ASSEMBLY MEMBER I
BERMAN WHO AS I UNDERSTAND IS
THERE AS WELL EXCUSE ME MY
NAME'S KRISTINA LAWSON I AM THE
PRESIDENT HAS THE MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE WE GET INTO
THE SPECIFICS THAT OF OUR
PROPOSALS I JUST WANTED TO THANK
YOU FOR HOLDING THIS HEARING
TODAY AND PROVIDING THE BOARD
OPPORTUNITIES TO TALK ABOUT OUR
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS REALLY ARE
INTENDED TO ENHANCE THE BOARD'S
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. AND THE
BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED A VARIETY
OF AREAS OF NEED IN OUR
PORTSMOUTH PROGRAM- WHICH
INCLUDED CONSIDERATIONS-
COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC
AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS AND YOU
KNOW AS YOU SAW WITH THEIR
JANUARY MEMO WE REALLY BELIEVED
IT WAS NECESSARY TO ELEVATE THE
BOARD'S NEEDS FOR IMPROVEMENT TO
THE LEGISLATURE ABSOLUTE BATTLE
WE WANTED THE SPECIFIC- AT TOPIC
WITH ANYTHING YOU'RE INTERESTED
IN HEARING ABOUT FIRST WHICH IS.
OUR PROPOSAL REGARDING THE
BURDEN OF PROOF THAT YOU WERE
JUST DISCUSSING WITH THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AND SO
UST FOR AN OVERVIEW OF THE
PROPOSAL UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW
CURRENTLY WE BELIEVE THAT THE
BOARD IS AT A SIGNIFICANT
DISADVANTAGE IN COMPARISON TO
MOST OTHER MEDICAL BOARDS ACROSS
THE COUNTRY. I AM CURRENTLY.
WHEN WERE ATTEMPTING AND- I. AT
DID DID. WHEN ATTEMPTING TO AND
PROSECUTE A LICENSE. SUSPECTED
OF FAILING TO PROPERLY CARE FOR
PATIENTS OR OTHERWISE ACTED IN
AN UNPROFESSIONAL MANNER SO AS
YOU HEARD. AGAIN FROM H. YOU ARE
YOU IN FROM THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE PRIOR TO TAKING
ANY DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST
THE LICENSEE. MUST FIRST
INVESTIGATE TOGETHER AND THAT IS
THE VISION TO PROVE THAT
DISCIPLINE IS APPROPRIATE AND
NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.
IT IS THE PLAN IS TAILORED TO
THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF
EACH CASE. AND GENERALLY IT
INCLUDES ANYTHING FROM PUBLIC
REPRIMAND PROBATION SUSPENSION
OR COURSE REPLICATION. UNDER
CURRENT CASE LAW THE BOARD IS
REQUIRED TO OBTAIN CLEAR AND
CONVINCING. EVIDENCE I. CLEAR
AND CONVINCING PROOF TO
REASONABLE CERTAINTY
SPECIFICALLY THIS IS A HIGHER
BURDEN OF PROOF AND FORTY ONE
OTHER JURISDICTIONS THROUGHOUT
THE UNITED STATES AND ITS
TERRITORIES WHICH GENERALLY IN
THESE CIRCUMSTANCES FIVE A
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
STANDARD WHICH AGAIN AS AS A
RESULT CALIFORNIA IS OUT OF
STEP. WITH MOST OTHER
JURISDICTIONS MAKING IT MORE
DIFFICULT TIME CONSUMING AND-
EXPENSIVE HERE TO PROSECUTE
INSTANCES AND UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT IN THE STATE OF WE
BELIEVE OUR PROPOSAL TO CHANGE
AT THE BURDEN OF PROOF THAT
ENTRY STANDARDS. WILL HELP- FORD
OUT MORE QUICKLY COMPLETE
INVESTIGATIONS- AND WE EXPECT
THAT IT WILL ALSO PREVENT SOME
CASES FROM BEING CLOSE. OUT OF
THE LAW IS CHANGED IN THIS WAY
THE BOARD EXPECTS IT
INVESTIGATIONS VERY
INTENTIONALLY CONCLUDED AN
EARLIER POINT SINCE LAST
EVIDENCE WILL BE REQUIRED TO
FILE AN INITIAL ACCUSATION. AND
ENABLING THIS EARLIER ACTION
CAN'T ALLOW THE BOARD TO TAKE
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS WITH
PHYSICIANS BEFORE THEIR ISSUES
BECAUSE HE SENT HARM. THIS LOWER
BURDEN OF PROOF WOULD HAVE
POTENTIALLY ALLOW THE BOARD TO
TAKE ACTION ON MORE CASES THAN
CURRENTLY AND WE EXPECT FEWER
CASES TO BE CLOSED DUE TO
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. I WITH
THAT I AM I AM I HAVE OUR
COLLEAGUES FROM THE BOARD- HERE
IS WELL I'M I'M NOT SURE KERRY
OR- BUILDINGS LIKE TO ADD
ANYTHING AT THIS POINT THAT WERE
OF COURSE HAPPY TO. TAKE YOUR
QUESTIONS- ON THIS PROPOSAL. MS
WEBB ANYTHING. R. FOR I SEE YOU
ON THE SCREEN. NOTHING I THINK
MISS LAWSON SOME THAT UP VERY
WELL- YOU KNOW THE MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA IS OFTEN COMPARED
TO OTHER PORTS ACROSS THE
NATION- IN LOOKING AT STATISTICS
AND- WE DID SOME DIGGING AND
REALIZE THAT- AS MISS LAWSON
INDICATED. FORTY ONE OTHER
BOARDS ACROSS THE NATION
LICENSING MEDICAL DOCTORS HAVE A
LOWER BURDEN OF PROOF. AND
RECOGNIZING THAT- PEOPLE FROM
THE PUBLIC IN IN VARIOUS
LEGISLATORS HAVE CRITICISMS OF
THE BOARD WE THOUGHT THAT IT WAS
IMPORTANT TO YOU ADDENDA FIGHT
THIS AS AN ISSUE- POSING A
CHALLENGE TO BRING CASES. FOR
DISCIPLINARY ACTION AND THAT IT
IT IS A CRUEL THAT IT IS WITHIN
THE LEGISLATORS CHANCE TO
CORRECT. AUSTIN YOU KNOW WHAT WE
DO. IT IS DIFFERENT WHEN WE DO
SOMETHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE
MEDICAL BOARD DURING NEXT YEAR'S
SUNSET REVIEW PROCESS AND HAVING
TO DO WITH THE EVIDENCE RESPOND
STANDARD. HAS IMPLICATIONS THAT
EXTEND BEYOND THE MEDICAL BOARD
BECAUSE THEIR OTHER HEALTH CARE.
BOARDS THAT HAVE. THE SAME OR
SIMILAR ISSUES AND TO WHICH THE
SAME STANDARD APPLIES. THE CASE
AS I READ IT I WROTE RECOGNIZE
MAYBE THE DEFENSE PART TAKES A
DIFFERENT POSITION AND I'M NOT
THE SMARTEST PLAYER THAT WAS
EVER CREATED AND SO MAYBE I
DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES. BUT
THE CASE CLEARLY TALKS ABOUT
REPLICATION AND SUSPENSION. AND
A GOOD PORTION OF THE MEDICAL
BOARD. OF CALIFORNIA'S
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS DO NOT
INVOLVE REVOCATION CERTAINLY
REVOCATION SUSPENSION PERHAPS
MORE. IS THERE A WAY TO SORT OF
PRESERVE THE ARCHITECTURE THAT
WAS SET UP BY IT AND SURE AND
ALL THAT PRECEDED THAT MEASURE
HAVING TO DO WITH THE REVOCATION
AND SUSPENSION. AND APPLY A
DIFFERENT EVIDENCE RESEARCH
STANDARD PROOF STANDARD.
REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION. OR NOT
REBUTTAL PROPRIETOR TO THE
EVIDENCE RATHER- FOR THOSE
LESSER. CASES FOR WHICH LESSER
DISCIPLINE IS TYPICALLY APPLIED
IS THAT A FAIR QUESTION. IN IRAQ
ALL ALL- I'LL START ON THAT
QUESTION AND THEN I STOPPED IT
AND ADD AS WELL. BUT IT'S NOT
CLEAR TO THE BOARD AT THIS POINT
EXACTLY HOW IT WOULD WORK TO
HAVE DIFFERENT EVIDENTIARY
STANDARDS DEPENDING ON WHAT
DISCIPLINE IS DETERMINED AND-
THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE BOARD
CONDUCTED INVESTIGATIONS WITH
THE GOAL OF DISCOVERING EVIDENCE
OF A VIOLATION OF THE MEDICAL
PRACTICE ACT AND DOESN'T SPEAK A
PARTICULAR DISCIPLINARY OUTCOME.
AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS
SO AGAIN IT'S NOT CLEAR EXACTLY
HOW IT WOULD WORK TO HAVE A
DIFFERENT EVIDENTIARY STANDARD-
BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THAT THAT-
YOU KNOW DISCIPLINE THAT'S
THOUGHT AS YOU HEARD FROM THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE IT
USUALLY- WE REQUEST THE PANOPLY.
OF POTENTIAL OUTCOMES AND WE
DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR OUTCOME
DISCIPLINARY OUTCOME IN MIND
WHEN WE BEGIN TO INVESTIGATE-
THOSE CASES SO LIKE I SAID IT'S
NOT CLEAR TO THE MEDICAL OR
EXACTLY HOW HAVING MULTIPLE- OR
YOU KNOW A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT
ENTRY STANDARDS WOULD WORK IN
PRACTICE. FOR MY PROBLEM WITH IT
FRANKLY WITH THIS I MEAN I SEE
THE ISSUE- BUT I ALSO SEE THE
ISSUE I THINK FROM THE
PHYSICIAN'S STANDPOINT WHEN THE
PHYSICIAN IS FACING THE
ADMINISTRATIVE EQUIVALENT OF
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. BECAUSE OF
REPLICATION. AEROBIC OF A LACE
SOME RICH. A REVOCATION
TERMINATES THE INDIVIDUAL'S
ABILITY TO PRACTICE A PROFESSION
THAT THE INDIVIDUAL SPENT A
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME AND
EFFORT. GAINING ACCESS TO AND
PROBABLY SPENT A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF TIME AND EFFORT
PRACTICING PRIOR TO THE INCIDENT
THAT GAVE RISE TO THE
DISCIPLINARY ACTION I COULD SEE
IN THAT CASE THAT A
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE
51% IS- SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW THE
EVIDENCE THREE LEVEL THAT I
WOULD CERTAINLY EXPECT TO SEE
PRODUCED IN ORDER TO TAKE AWAY
SOMEONE'S LICENSE ON THE OTHER
HAND IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S
FAILED TO MAINTAIN RECORDS OR
HIS FAILED TO REPORT A
CONVICTION OR ANY OF THE NUMBER
OF THOSE OTHER OFFENSES THAT I
DIDN'T PULL MY NOTES FROM ONE OF
THE LAST HEARINGS BUT THAT WE
WENT THROUGH THE LAST TIME AND
PEOPLE WHO GOT PUBLIC REPRIMANDS
IN THE SAID THE OTHER DAY. THAT
THOSE ARE DIFFERENT SORTS OF
CASES WERE. TRYING TO NAIL DOWN
EVERY NAIL AND CLOSE EVERY DOOR
AND LINE UP TO EXPERTS TO TALK
ABOUT WHATEVER IT IS WE THINK WE
NEED AN EXPERT FOR WHEN EITHER
THE CONTACTS ADMITTED OR ITS A
CONVICTION OR WHATEVER. THAT
THERE SHOULD BE SOME DIFFERENCE
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT
EITHER AT THIS POINT BUT I'D I'D
LIKE TO. HAVE A CONVERSATION
ABOUT HOW WE DO THAT BECAUSE- TO
SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO SHIFT
TO. A PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE 51% STANDARD WHERE
WE'RE PROPOSING TO TAKE AWAY
SOMEONE'S. LICENSE TO EARN A
LIVING. SEEMS A LITTLE.
PROBLEMATIC AND ONE THAT IS. AN
ISSUE THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO
CAUSE A CONVERSATION IT EXTENDS
WELL BEYOND THIS HEARING IN MY
MAKING SENSE. YES SENATOR YOU'RE
MAKING PERFECT SENSE AND AGAIN I
JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE
CALIFORNIA IS A LIAR HERE RIGHT-
AND SO WE HAVE A HIGHER OF AN
ENTRY STANDARDS AND JUST ABOUT
EVERYBODY ELSE RIGHT- FORTY ONE
OTHER JURISDICTIONS. THROUGHOUT
THE UNITED STATES AND ITS
TERRITORIES USE THAT
PREPONDERANCE. OF EVIDENCE
STANDARD. AGAIN I THINK THIS
GETS TRICKY BECAUSE- WHEN WE DO. I CAN SPEAK TO THE S. AGAIN
WE'RE NOT WE DON'T HAVE A
PARTICULAR DISCIPLINARY OUTCOME
IN MIND AND WE ACTUALLY DON'T
KNOW WHERE THE EVIDENCE IS GOING
TO LEAD US RIGHT SO SOMETIMES-
BABBITT AND SELL JUST PROVIDE AN
EXAMPLE. IS SOMETIMES WE ARE.
INVESTIGATING YOU KNOW SOME SOME
SOME BREACH OF THE STANDARD OF
CARE- EIGHT IN TERMS OF- AT
PATIENT CARE AND YOU KNOW
ALTERNATELY THE BEST EVIDENCE
THE CLEARING CONVINCING EVIDENCE
WE HAVE LEADS US TO A- LIKE YOU
SAID MEDICAL RECORDS ERROR RIGHT
OR VIOLATION THAT'S WHAT
ULTIMATELY GETS YOU KNOW PUT
INTO THE ACCUSATION. BECAUSE WE
CAN'T PROVE IT- THE YET PATIENT
CARE ISSUE AS FAIRLY SO IF IT
WOULD BE HARD TO HAVE A
DIFFERENT STANDARD FOR THOSE
SORTS OF THINGS BECAUSE YOU KNOW
FROM THE OUTSET BECAUSE WE JUST
DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT
INVESTIGATION IS GOING TO LEAD
US. FOLLOWING UP ON A COMPLAINT
AND SO I GUESS I'M JUST NOT SURE
EXACTLY HOW IN PRACTICE IT'S
GONNA WORK WE'RE CERTAINLY OPEN
TO. EXPLORING AT THIS WITH YOU
FURTHER LIKE YOU SAID I THINK
THAT- YEAH FURTHER DISCUSSIONS
ARE GOING TO BE IMPORTANT. FOR
US TO BE ABLE TO GET THIS RIGHT.
SO IF USE IF YOU ATTACHED
DIFFERENT PROOF STANDARDS TO
DIFFERENT LEVELS OF OFFENSES.
AND I DON'T KNOW YOUR PROCESS I
MEAN I'M OUT OF MY SANDBOX BUT
YOU'RE MOVING THROUGH THE
INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS WITH THE
DCA INVESTIGATORS WHOEVER. AND
YOU DETERMINED OKAY. WHAT WE
HAVE HERE IS A IS A FAILURE TO
MAINTAIN RECORDS AND A FAILURE
TO DISCLOSE WHATEVER. BUT WE
DON'T HAVE- OF WHAT I WOULD CALL
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE OR OF FILL
YOU TO HEAR THE STANDARDS OF
CARE WE DON'T HAVE ONE OF THOSE
CASES. WE DON'T HAVE A CRIMINAL
SITUATION WHERE CRIMINAL
STATUTES ARE IMPLICATED IN ITS
CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT WHETHER OR
NOT CHARGED. IS IT POSSIBLE FOR
SOMEBODY THIS PUT TO FLIP THE
LIGHT SWITCH AND SAY OKAY WE'RE
GOING TO PROCEED IN THE STANDARD
IS BECAUSE WE SET OUT IN THE
STATUTE. THE STANDARD IS
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE
CHARGES CHARGE WHAT YOU HAVE AND
LET'S MOVE FORWARD AND BE DONE
WITH THIS. IS THAT A NAIVE
APPROACH TO HOW YOU WORK MISTER
. RECEIVE HER. YES IF I CAN COME
IN HERE- YEAH I'LL BEAT THE
ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IS THAT AT
WHAT POINT DO YOU MAKE THAT
DETERMINATION IN TERMS OF WHERE
YOU'RE GOING AND MANY TIMES YOU
MAKE THAT DETERMINATION AFTER
THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS HAS
ALREADY BEGUN AND HAS ALREADY
GONE A CONSIDERABLE WAY SO IT'S
VERY DIFFICULT TO HAVE SO THE
TWO SETS OF STANDARDS WOULD YOU
DON'T KNOW WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO
SWITCH FROM ONE TO THE OTHER
FUNDING BECAUSE THAT'S BECAUSE
YOUR LAWYER DOESN'T GET INVOLVED
UNTIL THE BACK INTO THE CASE.
WELL WE ARE INVOLVED THE MEDICAL
BOARD IS INVOLVED AT IT AT ALL
PHASES OF THE CASE SO WE'RE
ALWAYS THERE MANAGING THE MAKING
DETERMINATIONS NOW WHAT WE HAVE
LOOKED AT WE LOOK AT OTHER
JURISDICTIONS AND SOME OF THEM
NOT MANY HAVE TWO DIFFERENT
STANDARDS BUT IT'S NOT BASED ON
THE DEGREE OF SANCTIONS THAT IS
SOUGHT BUT ACTUALLY ON SUBJECT
MATTER SO FOR EXAMPLE A SMALL
NUMBER OF JURISDICTIONS HAVE A
LOWER STANDARD OF PROOF FOR
LET'S SAY SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASE. AND THE RATIONALE THERE IS
WELL UNDERSTOOD BECAUSE
SOMETIMES IN SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASES THE ONLY EVIDENCE IS THAT
IT TWO WITNESSES WHO SAY THINGS
THAT ARE CONTRADICTORY WELL
ACTUALLY THAT'S WHAT I WAS
SUGGESTING AS YOU GO THROUGH
YOUR INVESTIGATION YOU KNOW IT'S
NOT A MEDICAL MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
CASE AT SOME POINT YOU MAY KNOW
IT'S NOT A CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT
CASE AT SOME POINT. YOU KNOW
BASED ON YOUR INVESTIGATION IT'S
NOT AN X. Y. Z. YOU DO KNOW IT'S
A B. AND C. SO A. B. AND C.
THOSE OFFENSES CALL FOR PROOF-
BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE IF TAKEN TO A TRIAL
BEFORE AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JUDGE SO YOU PURSUE A B. AND C.
YOUR EVIDENCE FREE STANDARD WITH
THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE IF
IT ACTUALLY THIS SIXTEEN DATE
18221% OF THE CASES THAT GET
THERE. THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE STANDARD WOULD BE
APPLIED NOT A CLEAR AND
CONVINCING BY THE JUDGE SO I'M
ACTUALLY SUGGESTS STING. MR
PACIFICO WHAT EXACT WHAT YOU'RE
THAT IT'S TIED TO THE SUBJECT
MATTER THAT'S BEING CHARGED DOES
THAT MAKE SENSE NO I UNDERSTAND
WHERE YOU'RE GETTING AT BUT YOU
HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT FOR
EXAMPLE IN SOME GROSS NEGLIGENCE
CASES WHICH COULD BE CHARACTER
IT CHARACTERIZES MALPRACTICE
COULD RESULT IN REVOCATION
CORRECTLY SO IF SOMEONE IS
GROSSLY NEGLIGENT AND UNFIT TO
PRACTICE ON THOSE GROUNDS WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING SO YOU TO SET
ASIDE. THE SET ASIDE THE
STANDARDS CASES WHAT I CALL
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ALLEGED
CASES YOU SET THOSE ASIDE AS A
CURRENT CONVINCING EVIDENCE
STANDARD SITUATION BECAUSE
THERE'S CLEARLY CAN RESULT IN
REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF A
LICENSE UNDER AT LEISURE- AND
THEN PROCEED FORWARD WITH THOSE
. WELL A BIT AGAIN WE HAVE THE
WHOLE LET'S SAY. A PLEA OF
DISHONESTY CASES OF FRAUD CASE
SOME OF THOSE COULD BE
CHARACTERIZED SIMPLY AS
RECORDKEEPING CASES WHICH ARE
NOT VERY SERIOUS BUT OTHER CASES
I WOULD SAY ARE EXTREMELY
SERIOUS AND WOULD ALSO RESULT
ULTIMATELY IN THE PROPER
RESOLUTION BEING SUSPENSION OR
REVOCATION. SO I THINK THAT IT'S
NOT A SIMPLE MATTER TO DIVIDE
THESE UP BY SUBJECT MATTER
BECAUSE WITH IN THOSE CATEGORY
OF CASES YOU'LL FIND SOME WHICH
ARE WHICH WILL NOT RESULT IN THE
SERIOUS SANCTION BUT OTHERS THAT
WILL AND AGAIN YOU'VE ALREADY
BEGUN THE INVESTIGATION. AND
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO HAVE TWO
SETS OF STANDARDS FOR THOSE
TYPES OF CASES WELL THE
DIFFICULTY I SEE PREPONDERANCE
OF THE EVIDENCE IS A CIVIL
STANDARD. SO THIS IS NOT A
SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY PULLS
OUT A CHECKBOOK AND PAYS THE
MONEY. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE
SOMEBODY HAS TO DO SOMETHING
ELSE ISSUE A PUBLIC APOLOGY THIS
IS IN A SITUATION WHERE SOMEONE
HAS TO GIVE UP A BUILDING. OR
EVEN A HOUSE THIS IS A SITUATION
WHERE REVOCATION SOMEONE LOSES
THE ABILITY TO DO ANY TO DO TO
PRACTICE MEDICINE ANYWHERE IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND
PROBABLY LOSES THE ABILITY
WITHOUT SOME. APPEAL FIGHT TO
PRACTICE MEDICINE. ANYWHERE AT
LEAST FOR A PERIOD OF TIME SO.
IT'S A PRETTY SERIOUS THING AND
I JUST WONDER IF EVEN IF WE
WANTED TO DO SO WE WOULD BE
SUCCESSFUL IN TRYING TO LOWER.
THE EVIDENCE FREESTANDING ACROSS
THE BOARD INCLUDING REVOCATION
CASES. TO PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE BUT I'M TRYING TO
EXPLORE WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES
ARE WE WON'T OBVIOUSLY BE ABLE
TO DO IT. IN TOTAL TODAY BUT
PERHAPS WE CAN CONTINUE THIS
CONVERSATION BECAUSE I SEE
EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT I SEE A NEED. TO HAVE A
DIFFERENT STANDARD FOR MANY OF
THE CASES THAT YOU DEAL WITH-
BUT I I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. CASES
WHERE SOMEONE CAN LOSE THE
ABILITY TO PRACTICE A
PROFESSION. I'M SORRY SENATE IF
I CAN MAKE ONE SMALL POINT HERE
MAYBE TO PUT IT INTO A LARGER
CONTEXT THE PROFESSIONAL BOARDS
HAVE A RATHER LENGTHY AN
INTERESTING SOCIAL HISTORY THEY
BEGAN AS SIMPLY- BASICALLY
ALMOST TRADE ORGANIZATIONS
ORGANIZED BY THE PROFESSION THAT
SELLS. VERY WELL INTENTIONED
ATTEMPTING TO SET STANDARDS FOR
THE PROFESSION THEY HAVE A BOLT.
IN TIME TO MORE PROFESSIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS IN CALIFORNIA HAS
ALWAYS BEEN AT THE LEADING EDGE
OF BAD MOVING AWAY FROM A SORT
OF TRADE ASSOCIATION MODEL TO
ONE BASED ON PUBLIC PROTECTION.
SIMILARLY SPEAKING OF MANY
JURISDICTIONS INTERNATIONALLY
AND ALSO WITHIN THE COUNTRY HAVE
MOVED AWAY FROM THIS IDEA THAT
THE PARAMOUNT CONCERN IS THE
TREATMENT OF THE LICENSE AS A
PROPERTY RIGHT WHERE IT IS SEEN
THAT IT'S MORE A PRIVILEGE TO
PRACTICE MEDICINE. AND WHAT IS
PARAMOUNT IS PUBLIC PROTECTION
AND THEREFORE WHAT YOU NEED TO
DO IS TO HAVE A MEDICAL BOARD
STAFFED WITH EXPERTS WITH
EXPERTISE AT MANY DIFFERENT
LEVELS INCLUDING THOSE. IN AND
YOU'VE HEARD FROM TWO OF THOSE
BODIES TO WORK WITH US VERY
CLOSELY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S
OFFICE IN THE H. Q. I YOU. IN B.
HIGHER EVIDENTIARY STANDARD IN
THAT ADMINISTRATIVE CONTACTS IS
NOT APPROPRIATE WHERE IT'S SEEN
THAT. PATIENT PROTECTION IS OF
PARAMOUNT NO OTHER STATES HAVE
GONE THIS WROTE IN CALIFORNIA IT
REMAINS THE OUT LIAR AND THAT'S
SOMETHING WE HAVE TO BRING TO
YOUR ATTENTION WELL I I'M AWARE
OF THAT AND I DID READ THE AT
AND YOUR DECISION AND- I THOUGHT
IT AND THROUGH THE COURT AT YOUR
MADE IT INTERESTING. A
DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE SKELLY
DECISION WHICH IS THE DECISION
THAT GOVERNS HELP STATE THE END
AND OTHER TYPES OF GOVERNMENT
DISCIPLINE AND TERMINATE.
EMPLOYEES AND THE CASE OF
PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE LICENSED
AND- AND THE POINT MADE WAS THAT
IN THE SKELLY DECISION WHEN
YOU'RE DEALING WITH AN EMPLOYEE.
YOU WERE SIMPLY TERMINATING THAT
EMPLOYEE WITH DUE PROCESS OF
COURSE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT
SKELLY WAS ABOUT. TERMINATING
THAT EMPLOYEE JUST FROM THAT
PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT. PERHAPS
WITH THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO OR
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BUT
YOU'RE NOT TERMINATING THAT
EMPLOYEES ABILITY TO GET A JOB
IN ANY OTHER LOCATION DOING ANY
OTHER THING INCLUDING THE VERY
THING. THE EMPLOYEE WAS DOING
FOR THE PARTICULAR GOVERNMENT
ENTITY IN THE CASE OF A
PROFESSIONAL LICENSE OR THE
LICENSES REVOKED. YOU'RE
TERMINATING THE ABILITY OF
INDIVIDUALS ABILITY TO PRACTICE
THAT PROFESSION WITH THAT
LICENSE IN CASE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA SO I DO THINK IT'S AN
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION I DON'T
WANT TO DOMINATE THE
pMY COLLEAGUES IF THEY HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS
PARTICULAR. THIS PARTICULAR ONE
I SEE CENTER MAN NODDING NO OF
SURE BERMAN AND CAROLINE SHE
JUST A QUICK QUESTION AND I
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AND
LIKE YEAH- ZHAROV MENTIONED FOR
THE WILL BE MORE- OVER THE
COMING. MONTHS AND THEN YEAR-
BUT IF SOMEBODY MENTIONED HOW
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS HIGHER IN
THE IN CALIFORNIA THAN IT IS IN
FORTY ONE OTHER STATES. HAVE AS
ANYONE IDENTIFIED AS A KIND OF
CORRELATED DIFFERENCE IN
STATISTICS REGARDING ENFORCEMENT
OUTCOMES FOR STATES WITH A LOWER
EVIDENTIARY STANDARD. THERE ANY
DATA OUT THERE. WELL THERE IS
THE FEDERATION OF STATE MEDICAL
BOARD COLLECTS DATA ACROSS
JURISDICTIONS- THERE IS THAT
CONSUMER WATCHDOG REPORT WHERE
WHICH WHICH HIGHLIGHTED
COMPARISONS. BETWEEN A DIFFERENT
STATES LET'S PUT IT THIS WAY I
WE'RE NOT AWARE OF ANY ROBUST
SYSTEMATIC. ANALYSIS UP ON THIS
I WOULD CAUTION. THE I WOULD
CONSCIOUS I WOULD CAUTION ABOUT
INTERPRETING SUCH RESULTS
BECAUSE EVIDENTIARY STANDARD IS
OBVIOUSLY A VERY CRITICAL
FACTOR. IN THE FACT THAT WE
START OFF WITH A MUCH HIGHER
STANDARD OBVIOUSLY MUST BE
INTERPRETED BUT THERE ARE OTHER
STANDARDS THERE ARE OTHER
ELEMENTS AS WELL. DEALING WITH
THE WHOLE LEGAL CULTURE OTHER
ASPECTS OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM A
WITH THE CULTURE OF THE MEDICAL
PROFESSION AND A WHOLE RANGE OF
OTHER THINGS. AS WELL BUT
CERTAINLY IF YOU WERE LOOKING AT
A COMPARISON AS WAS DONE. LAST
YEAR SAYING THAT- CALIFORNIA
STOOD THIRTY THIRD IN TERMS OF.
AMOUNT OF DISCIPLINE PER DOCTOR
YOU WOULD HAVE TO TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT THAT WE HAVE A MUCH
HIGHER STANDARD OF PROOF. DAN OF
THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE
STATES COULD KNOW THE SIMPLE
ANSWER IS THAT THERE IS NO
ROBUST. A SYSTEMATIC-
DETERMINATION ARE THAT YOU WOULD
BE LOOKING FOR THANKS. ARE YOU
ABLE TO. THIS IS NOT A QUESTION
THAT OBVIOUSLY CAN EVEN BEGIN TO
BECOME BIG BE ANSWERED TODAY BUT
ARE YOU ABLE TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THE VARIOUS ACTS AND OFFENSES
ALLEGED OFFENSES THAT YOU
INVESTIGATE. AND EITHER MOVE
FORWARD ON OR DO NOT. AND SORT
OF SEPARATE OUT THOSE WHERE THE
CLEAR AND CONVINCING STANDARD
WOULD. WOULD BE APPROPRIATE
BECAUSE THOSE OFFENSES MORE
LIKELY THAN NOT OR IN SOME CASES
ANYWAY COULD LEAD TO REVOCATION
OR SUSPENSION AND HANDLE THE
LIST OF OFFENSES WHERE ORG
MISCONDUCT OR CONDUCT. WHERE
IT'S NOT LIKELY SO WE COULD
BEGIN TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ON
SEPARATING OUT- SITUATIONS AND
APPLYING FOR EXAMPLE TWO
DIFFERENT EVIDENTIARY STANDARDS
DEPENDING. I THINK THAT WOULD BE
QUITE A HERCULEAN TASK AND IF I
COULD JUST RELATED TO AN ISSUE
WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER- THAT
THAT THAT YOU WERE ABOUT WHETHER
OFFENSES ARE RELATED TO THE
PRACTICE. OF MEDICINE I
CERTAINLY TAKE A MORE ROBUST
VIEW OF FACT- IF YOU HAVE A
DOCTOR WHO IS ENGAGED IN SERIOUS
FRAUD SERIOUS VIOLENCE. YES
ACTED AGAINST THE PUBLIC- YOU
KNOW I THINK ARGUABLY IT'S NOT-
IT AYE. THOSE ARE THINGS WHICH
ARE VERY GERMANE TO THE
PRACTICE. OF MEDICINE BUT BASS
DANCE JOB THAT WE HAVE TO
UNDERTAKE IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW
EDUCATING THE WIDER COMMUNITY S.
WORKING WITH- THE ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW JUDGES. TWO PRESSING THE
ISSUE OF A MORE ROBUST APPROACH
TO THESE TYPES OF CASES SO
THERE'S A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY
THERE AND I AS I INDICATED
EARLIER. THERE IS A FAST. AMOUNT
THE VAST NUMBER OF CONDUCT THAT
AT THE VERY SERIOUS LEVEL COULD
RESULT IN IN SHOULD RESULT IN
REVOCATION SUSPENSION BUT AT THE
MINOR LEVEL WOULD NOT BE SERIOUS
OFFENSES AND SHOULD BE DEALT
WITH ADMINISTRATIVELY-
INFORMALLY FRANKLY. WELL OF
COURSE THE WHOLE PURPOSE FOR
THIS CONVERSATION IS TO TRY TO
SEE IF WE CAN SQUEEZE
EFFICIENCIES OUT OF THE MEDICAL
BOARD OPERATION AND ALLOW YOU
TO. TO RE DIRECT RESOURCES TO
THOSE SMOKE MORE SERIOUS MOST
SERIOUS CASES- AND DISPOSE OF
THOSE THAT ARE PARTICULARLY
SERIOUS IN A- IN A MORE RAPID-
PROCESS. WITHOUT JEOPARDIZING
CONSUMER PROTECTION. AND ALL THE
REST OF THAT SO IT MAY BE THAT
WERE SIMPLY. THAT THAT WAS GOING
TO BE VERY VERY DIFFICULT SO I
LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUED
CONVERSATION ON THIS ANYTHING
FURTHER BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE
NEXT. AGENDA ITEM. SENATOR ROB-
AND CARRIE WEBB HERE. ONLY TO. I
DO HAVE TO ADMIT THAT I'M
CONCERNED ABOUT THE IDEA OF
HAVING A HIGHER BURDEN OF PROOF
IT'S YES- REVOCATION IS A
POSSIBILITY BECAUSE AS- MISS
CASTRO INDICATED AND AS MR
PERSICA AND SLAUSON INDICATED-
THIS REVOCATION IS ALWAYS A
POSSIBILITY WHEN AN ACCUSATION
IS FILE DON'T KNOW AT THAT
POINT. WHAT THE DEFENSE EVIDENCE
WILL SHOW HOW THE CASE WILL
DEVELOP- AND MR PERSISTED DID
MENTION THAT- WHEN WE DELVED
INTO APPLICATION OF BURDENS OF
PROOF- THERE IS OUT OF FOR
EXAMPLE HAS A LOWER BURDEN OF
PROOF FOR SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASES PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE. IN OTHER CASES- THAT'S
REFLECTIVE OF HOW DIFFICULT
THOSE CASES CAN BE APPROVED.
WHEN SOMETIME IT'S BASED ON JUST
COMPETING STATEMENTS BUT
OBVIOUSLY SEXUAL MISCONDUCT
CASES COULD VERY WELL RESULT IN
REVOCATION. SO I JUST AGAIN
WANTED TO YOU ARE. SURE CONCERNS
REGARDING THAT THE IDEA THAT
YOU'RE PROPOSING. RIGHT WELL AND
KNOWS OUR PUBLIC POLICY
DECISIONS THAT. WE ARE CALLED
UPON TO MAKE IN CONJUNCTION WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION. AND WE HAVE
TO WEIGH THE VARIOUS FACTORS IN
MAKING THOSE PUBLIC POLICY
DECISIONS AYE. IT MAY VERY WELL
BE THAT THIS IS ONE OF THOSE.
QUESTIONS AND ISSUES THAT SIMPLY
A BRIDGE TOO FAR- I JUST I CAN'T
GET. PART OF MY HEAD THE THOUGHT
THAT WHEN YOU LAUNCH AN
INVESTIGATION WHEN YOU RECEIVE A
COMPLAINT KNOWING THAT IN
LOOKING INTO THE COMPLAINT YOU
MAY UNCOVER OTHER ISSUES YOU MAY
DECIDE THAT THE ISSUES
COMPLAINED ABOUT DON'T RISE TO
ANYTHING BUT YOU FIND OTHER
THINGS THAT REQUIRE
INVESTIGATION IT'S A FLUID
PROCESS WHERE I WOULD ASSUME
INVESTIGATORS IN CONJUNCTION
WITH. YOUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
AND IS TO THE EXTENT THE BOARD
MEMBERS ARE INVOLVED IF YOU MAKE
DECISIONS TO GO FAST GO SLOW
STOP TURN AROUND BOTH LEFT MOVE
RIGHT. IT'S NOT OF. THROTTLE TO
THE WALL AND FULL SPEED AHEAD
WITHOUT MAKING CHANGES IN AS YOU
MAKE CHANGES. I WOULD. I WOULD
CERTAINLY EXPECT THE NATURE OF
THE INVESTIGATION CHANGES IT
BECOMES MORE SERIOUSLY FOCUSED.
LESS SERIOUSLY FOCUSED AND SO. I
WOULD THINK WE WOULD BE ABLE TO
MAKE DETERMINATIONS AS TO. WHAT
THE EVIDENCE FREE STANDARD IS
WHAT THE WHAT THE DESIRED. WHAT
THE EXPECTED OUTCOME IS GOING TO
TRIAL BEFORE AN ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW JUDGE SEEKING REVOCATION NOT
SEEKING REVOCATION SEEKING A
PUBLIC REPRIMAND. SO THERE COULD
BE ADJUSTMENTS ALONG THE WAY BUT
AGAIN I MAY BE VERY OFTEN THIS
AND SO. I LOOK FORWARD AS WE
MOVE FORWARD AFTER THIS HEARING
THAT HAVE CONTINUED CONVERSATION
TO SEE. SINCE THE BOARD'S
PROPOSED A CHANGE IN THE
EVIDENCE RESTATED IF WE CAN MAKE
THAT CHANGE WORK. CONSISTENT
WITH. CERTAIN SURE OR CHANGES TO
ENSURE L. LOOK FORWARD TO. TO
JUST TALKING THROUGH THIS MORE
WITH EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU IN
MY COLLEAGUES BOTH. IN THE
ASSEMBLY AND HERE. IN THE SENATE
COLLEAGUES ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS. LET'S MOVE ON TO IF
YOU WILL- TO ISSUE NUMBER FIVE
WHICH IS CURRENT LAW IS
SUFFICIENT REGARDING MANDATORY
REPORTING OF PHYSICIAN PRACTICE.
AND CONDUCT BY HEALTH.
FACILITIES TO THE MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA DIVERSE PROPOSAL'S
EMBEDDED IN THAT ISSUE SO.
PLEASE TAKE IT AWAY MISS LAWSON.
THANK YOU SHARED THAT THE
QUESTION FIRST WE BELIEVE THAT
THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS
NO WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT CURRENT
LAW IS SUFFICIENT. FOR PUBLIC
PROTECTION HERE SO THE BOARD IS
REALLY CONCERNED THAT THE
CURRENT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE-
FOR PEER REVIEW BODIES AND
HEALTH FACILITIES TO REPORT
INSTANCES UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT. IT'S NOT SUFFICIENT TO
PROTECT THE PUBLIC. MOST
INVESTIGATIONS ARE STARTED
FOLLOWING. CONSUMER COMPLAINTS
RATHER THAN- YOU KNOW REPORTING
FROM AGAIN IF YOU'RE A PEABODY
OR HEALTH FACILITY. AB WHICH
OFTEN OCCURS AFTER HE HAS BEEN
HARDER THERE HAS BEEN SOME
VIOLATION OF THE STANDARD OF
CARE. WE BELIEVE THAT THE
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF
REQUIRED REPORTS WOULD ALLOW THE
BOARD TO STEP IN AND EARLIER IN
THE PROCESS. AND WOULD REDUCE
REDUCE THE BURDEN ON CONSUMERS
TO TELL THE BOARD BUT THERE IS A
PROBLEM WITH THE PARTICULAR
LICENSEE. JUST TO ILLUSTRATE THE
POINT THE BOARD. MORE THAN TEN
THOUSAND COMPLAINTS EACH YEAR
FOR PROXIMITY TWO HUNDRED
COMPLAINTS ANNUALLY. PUT THAT
TEN THOUSAND PROVOKED
DISABILITIES RELATED TO
UNPROFESSIONAL. CONTACTS. WHY
GENERALLY WORK. A REPORT TO
FILED WITH BOARD IF YOU'RE NEW
BODY TO OVER. CERTAIN ACTIONS
AGAIN THAT FOR THE THIRD. DUE TO
A DISCIPLINARY BECAUSE REASON OR
OTHER PROFESSIONAL. ADVICE AND
ON. IT A LOT OF HEALTH CARE
FACILITY AND CLOSE SECONDARY AND
INSTITUTION. REPORTS COMPLY THAT
FACT MISS. ABOUT HEALING ARTS
FROM. THE APPROPRIATE LICENSE
AND IT'S COURSE FAILURE
ARE WORK MAY RESULT IN AS ALFIE
. I WHILE WHILE THE FOR OF ARE
HELP THE BILL DOES THE IT I
THESE REQUIRE TO IN ALL
ORGANIZATIONS THAT EMPLOYER
CONTRACT WITH PHYSICIANS WILL
HELP ENSURE WERE AWARE OF MORE
INSTANCES OF UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT THE GOAL OF THIS
WHATEVER AN ORGANIZATION THAT
EMPLOYS A POSITION OR CONTRACTS
FOR THE SERVICES WITH ME ABOUT
POSITION- TERMINATES OR CHANGES
CURRENT. OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT FOR
SIR DUE TO A MEDICAL. BECAUSE OR
REASON FOR IT SHOULD BE MADE
AWARE AND WE DON'T BELIEVE
THAT'S CURRENTLY THE CASE COURSE
IT STANDS TO REASON THAT IF AN
ORGANIZATION TAKES ADVERSE
ACTION AGAINST A POSITION THAT
IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE
MEDICAL BOARD TO BE MADE AWARE.
THAT WE MAY DETERMINE WHETHER
THERE IS ALSO A VIOLATION OF THE
MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT- AND
DISCIPLINARY ACTION IS
WARRANTED. BY INCREASING REPORTS
THAT CONTRA PHYSICIANS HEARING
PLAYERS THIS PROPOSAL MAY HELP
WITH WEIGHT PATIENT HARM IT WILL
REDUCE THE BURDEN ON CONSUMERS
TO FILE COMPLAINTS WELL AND
FURTHER CONSUMERS MIGHT NOT BE
AWARE OF EVERY INSTANT MY
PHYSICIAN ACT IN AN
UNPROFESSIONAL MANNER.
ESPECIALLY IF BACK TOGETHER
CONSUMER WAS NOT HARMED BY THE
DECISION I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS OF COURSE AND AYE AYE
AGAIN THIS WEBER. IF YOU HAVE
ANYTHING ADDITIONAL. TO ADD A
FIFTY. I JUST HAVE ONE WHAT WHAT
WHAT. DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU WERE
TO THE TERM WELLNESS COMMITTEES
. IMPLICATE HE ÁP ORGANIZATIONS
OR- OTHER ORGANIZATIONS WHERE
THERE MAY BE SO- PROTECTION. I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER THAT MISS LAWSON
. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR HAVING US-
SO. IT'S A PHYSICIAN WHO. HAS A
SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUE OR IS
DESTRUCTIVE IN SOME WAY
MISTREATING STAFF MISTREATING
PATIENTS- MAY BE REFERRED TO A
WELLNESS COMMITTEE TO AVOID
GOING THROUGH THE PEER REVIEW
PROCESS. THESE COULD BE VERY
SERIOUS BEHAVIORAL ISSUES THAT
PUT PATIENT SAFETY AT RISK YET
IT DOESN'T GO THROUGH THE PEER
REVIEW PROCESS AND SO IT DOESN'T
TRIGGER AND IN EIGHT OH FIVE
REPORT- BUT A WELLNESS COMMITTEE
COULD INSTRUCT ABOUT THE
POSITION TO- STOP PRACTICING FOR
A PERIOD OF TIME- YET AGAIN. THE
BOARD IS NOT MADE AWARE OF IT
EVEN KNOWS THIS PERSON MAY POSE
A SERIOUS CONSUMER PROTECTION
PROBLEM. SELL WERE RAISING THE
SENATE AS AN ISSUE- THERE ARE
ALL SORTS OF WAYS THAT.
FACILITIES TRY TO AVOID HAVING
TO FILE IN NATO FIVE REPORT- AND
IT USED TO BE BROUGHT TO YOUR
ATTENTION SAID THAT THE BOARD
CAN AGAIN. DISCOVER THESE
INDIVIDUALS SOONER TO TRY TO
TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION TO
PROTECT CONSUMERS SO I'M I'M
JUST TRYING TO NOT BEING. BEING
SOMEWHAT REMOVED FROM THIS
PROCESS EVEN FROM A HOSPITAL
BOARD STANDPOINT I WELL WELL
THIS COMMITTEE COULD BE
SOMETHING THAT A PHYSICIAN
VOLUNTARILY APPROACHES AND SAYS
I HAVE A SUBSTANCE ABUSE ALCOHOL
PROBLEM. SEEKING HELP AND
ASSISTANCE I GATHER. OR CAN
BOARD CAN ALSO BE A VEHICLE
WHERE. THE- PHYSICIAN GROUP IN A
HOSPITAL FOR EXAMPLE. SORT OF
VOLUNTARILY FORCES THE PHYSICIAN
TO GO TO THE WELLNESS COMMITTEE
OR FACE A PEER REVIEW PROCESS-
SET UP UNDER THE MEDICAL BYLAWS
AND THE CODE IS AND HOW THIS
COULD WORK. AND IF SO ARE WE
CONCERNED ABOUT. PUTTING A SORT
OF AN OBSTACLE IN FRONT OF FOR
MAKING IT DIFFICULT FOR
PHYSICIANS TO SELF IDENTIFY AND
SEEK HELP- BECAUSE IF THEY DO
THEN. AND IT'S NOT ONE OF THESE
SITUATIONS WHERE THE PEER REVIEW
PROCESS IS SORT OF FORCING THE
POSITION IN THAT DIRECTION TO
AVOID A REPORT. WE'RE SORT OF.
NOT WE'RE WE'RE DOING SOMETHING
OTHER THAN ENCOURAGING
PHYSICIANS TO SEEK HELP IS THAT
A FAIR QUESTION. CERTAINLY
COMPETING CONCERNS IN THAT.
ARENA IN PARTICULAR- THAT BEING
SAID THERE ARE DIFFERENT DEGREES
OF- IMPAIRMENT AND SOMEONE WHO
IS BEING INSTRUCTED TO TAKE TIME
OFF WORK- IF YOU KNOW THERE'S. I
GUESS MY QUESTION IS ARE THERE
OTHER WAYS A RATHER WHETHER WAYS
TO GET AT THIS PROBLEM SUCH AS
DIRECT YOU KNOW PLACING IN THE
MEDICAL PRACTICE ACT REQUIREMENT
THAT ANY PEER REVIEW- COMMITTEE
THAT THAT GAINS KNOWLEDGE OF
PHYSICIAN WITH A SUBSTANCE ABUSE
PROBLEM REPORT THAT FACT- AS
OPPOSED TO. PERHAPS PUTTING UP A
BARRIER TO PHYSICIAN ACCESS TO
WELLNESS COMMITTEES WHERE THAT'S
NOT IMPLICATED. YOU ALL WOULD
KNOW BETTER THAN I. ARE THERE
ALTERNATIVE WELL AND THAT THERE
MAY BE BUT- THE THING ABOUT IT-
FIVE REPORTS IS THAT. IT GETS IT
GETS REPORTED FOR OTHER
FACILITIES TO BE ABLE TO CHECK
THE STATUS OFTHE POSITION AND
SO IF SOMEONE IS DIVERTED ONLY
TO YOU A WELLNESS COMMITTEE AND-
TERMINATES THEIR EMPLOYMENTS
THEY CAN GO SOMEWHERE ELSE AND
THAT FACILITY WILL NOT HAVE THE
BENEFIT OF THE NATO FIVE REPORT
TO CHECK TO BE MADE AWARE OF THE
CIRCUMSTANCES. SO WE ARE
SENSITIVE TO THE FACT THAT THERE
ARE COMPETING CONCERNS IN THIS
REGARD WE WANT PHYSICIANS TO GET
THE HELP THAT THEY NEED IF THEY
HAVE SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES- WE
ALSO WANT TO PROTECT CONSUMERS
FROM PHYSICIANS WHO ARE
PRACTICING QUALITY CARE. SO THE
REAL ISSUE IS TO GET THE REPORT
AT THE POINT OF DIVERSION. RIGHT
IT MY FREEDOM TO MY
UNDERSTANDING THIS OF THE PEER
REVIEW COMMITTEE DIVERTS TO THE
WELLNESS COMMITTEE A POSITION.
AND WHAT WE WANT TO KNOW IS WE
WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S WE WANT TO
KNOW ABOUT THE DIVERSION. WHEN
THERE'S NO PEER REVIEW PROCESS
YOU KNOW WE DON'T WE THAT'S NOT
RIGHT NOW BOB NOVAK TODAY STILL
WE WANT TO USE THAT DAY EIGHT OH
FIVE TRIGGERING REQUIREMENTS SO
THAT IF THERE IS ANY A
SUSPENSION. OR LIMITATION PLACED
ON THE PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE THEN
THOSE ARE TRIGGERING EVENTS IF
IT'S FOR A MEDICAL DISCIPLINARY
CONSERVE THESE AND- NOT JUST THE
FACT THAT THEY HAVE A SUBSTANCE
ABUSE ISSUE AND ARE BEING
REFERRED TO THE WELLNESS
COMMITTEE BUT THAT THERE ARE-
SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUE OR OR
OTHER BEHAVIORAL CONCERNS.
TRIGGER THE NEED TO IMPOSE A
RESTRICTION ON THEIR ABILITY TO
PRACTICE I'M NOT SUGGESTING A
CHANGE DATA FIVE I'M JUST TRYING
TO SEPARATE OUT THE PEER REVIEW
. COMMITTEE THAT DEBT RELIEF ARE
DIFFER TO PHYSICIAN TO THE
WELLNESS COMMITTEE AND DOESN'T
FINISH SHE ATE ANY OTHER ANY
OTHER PROCESS. I'M TRYING TO
DISTINGUISH THAT WHICH I
UNDERSTAND THAT OCCURS IS MY
CORRECT YES I'M TRYING TO
DISTINGUISH THAT FROM THE
SITUATION WHERE THE PHYSICIAN.
NOT IMPLICATED IN THE PEER
REVIEW PROCESS PICKS UP THE
PHONE AND CALLED THE WELLNESS
COMMITTEE DIRECTOR AND SAYS I
GOT A PROBLEM. AND THE DIRECTOR
SAYS COME ON IN. WE I WOULD
THINK WE WOULDN'T WANT THAT WELL
THIS DIRECTOR COMMITTEE
DIRECTOR. TO HAVE TO REPORT TO
THE MEDICAL BOARD WOULD WE-
WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING THAT AT
THIS STAGE. EIGHT AGAIN WERE.
USING BUT IT A FIVE TRIGGERING
EVENTS WHERE THERE WOULD BE
SUSPENSION OR LIMITATION ON THE
PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE FIVE WELL I
THINK WE'RE PROBABLY TALKING
ABOUT THE SAME THING. I DON'T
WANT TO BELABOR THIS COLLEAGUES
ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY I HAVE NO
FURTHER QUESTIONS ON ITEM NUMBER. FIVE SO MANY QUESTIONS ABOUT
THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX
SHOULD THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS FOR SUBPOENA
ENFORCEMENT DURING THE
INVESTIGATORY PROCESS BE CHANGED
AND IF SO HOW WE'VE TOUCHED ON
THIS BRIEFLY. BUT LET'S DIVE
INTO IT A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL
MISSILE. THANK YOU AGAIN AND
SENATOR AND AGAIN WE BELIEVE
THAT THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION
IS. YES WE DO THINK THAT- THE
SHOULD BE CHANGED AS YOU HEARD
AND FOR MISS NICHOLS EARLIER I
WOULDN'T INCREASING FREQUENCY
OUR LICENSEES FAILED TO PRODUCE
MEDICAL RECORDS REQUIRED BY A
LAWFUL SUBPOENA RECORDS. AND
WHEN THIS HAPPENS THE
INVESTIGATE. EDUCATION PROFIT IS
. DRAWN OUT TEN PUTTING BOARDS
AT RISK- OF ANY EVENT WE FAILED
TO MEET THE STATURE LIMITATIONS
FOR FILING. OF COURSE IF WE'RE
UNABLE TO MEET THE STATURE
LIMITATIONS THE COMPLAINT MUST
BE CLOSE OUT WITHOUT ANY ACTION.
IN GENERAL THE BOARD MUST FILE
AN ACCUSATION AGAINST THE
LICENSEE EITHER WITHIN THREE
YEARS AFTER. LANES FOR SEVEN
YEARS TEN YEARS FOR SEXUAL-
WITHIN SEVEN YEARS FOLLOWING THE
DATE OF THE ALLEGED ACTS OR
OMISSIONS EXPERTS. UNDER CURRENT
LAW THE STATURE LIMITATIONS IS
POSTURE TOLD WHEN A LICENSEE
RECEIVES A SUPERIOR COURT ORDER
TO REQUIRE THEM TO TURN OVER
SUBPOENAED RECORDS TO THE BOARD.
AT THE BOARD MADE IT I YOU KNOW
IN IN CURRENT TIMES HAVE TO WAIT
MONTHS FOR COURT HEARINGS
DELAYING THE INVESTIGATION- AND
SWEET RELATEDLY DRIVING. UP THE
BOARDS COSTS. UNFORTUNATELY IS
LED- TO A PERVERSE AND SEND. FOR
LICENSEES TO DEFY THE **** WITH
THE HOPE THAT THEY'LL RUN OUT
THE CLOCK ON OUR INVESTIGATIONS.
THE BOARD DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT
YOU SHOULD BE PUT AT RISK
BECAUSE A LICENSEE FAILS TO TURN
OVER RECORDS FOLLOWING A LAWFUL
SUBPOENA. READY TO THE BOARD'S
RECORDS OVER THE PAST THREE
FISCAL YEARS THE BOARD IS YOU
KNOW TROUBLING INCREASE IN
INSTANCES WHERE THE BOARD HAS
BEEN REQUIRED. TO ENFORCE ITS
SUBPOENA IT IN SUPERIOR COURT
INCREASED TEN TIMES RUBISCO
YOU'RE EIGHTEEN NINETEEN AT TWO
THIRTY SEVEN TIMES AS FISCAL
YEAR TWENTY TWENTY ONE. WE ASK A
LOT OF CHANGES TO THE STATUE
LIMITATIONS IS TOLLED UPON THE
SERVICE OF A LAWFUL SUBPOENA NOT
UPON. THE ORDER OF THE SUPERIOR
COURTS WITHOUT BE HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE
ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL. COLLEAGUES
IN A ANY QUESTIONS. TERMEZ I
APPRECIATE YOUR- ANSWERS THAT
QUESTION BOB ARE THERE ANY
PENALTIES AND SHOULD WE DO
CONSIDER PENALTIES FOR NON
COMPLIANCE- AND GET THROUGH THE
PROBLEM IS THAT SOMETHING THAT
SPEND EXPLODED OFF THANK YOU FOR
THE QUESTION- SENATORS AND SO
CURRENTLY I BELIEVE THAT THERE
ARE LIKE THESE ARE CENTURY MAYBE
FIND SUBJECT TO PENALTIES OF UP
TO TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS IF THEY
FAIL TO COMPLY WITH A COURT
ORDER TO PRODUCE RECORDS. BUT
THAT OF COURSE DOES NOT APPLY
CURRENTLY INTO THE LICENSEE IS
ORDERED ADVISED TO CARE FOR A
CHANCE TO TURN OVER THIS RECORD.
THANK YOU FOR. YOU KNOW MY ONLY
COMMENT IS THAT I THINK THIS HAS
SOME VALUE- I THINK THE QUESTION
IS WHEN TO START TO TOTALING
PERIOD IS IT WHEN THE SUBPOENAS
SERVED- BECAUSE THERE MAY BE
ISSUES WITH THE SUBPOENA OR- THE
PARTICULARITY OF THE SUBPOENA
THE BREADTH OF THE SUBPOENA
THOSE. OF COURSE THE BURDEN IS
ON THE PERSON WHO GETS IT TO.
MAKE A MOTION TO NARROW THE
SCOPE OF THE SUBPOENA OR TO
QUESTION- BURDENS ON THE BOARD
TO FILE A MOTION TO COMPEL IF
YOU DON'T LIKE THE FACT THAT THE
INDIVIDUAL DIDN'T. COMPLY BUT OF
COURSE YOU CAN'T FILE A MOTION
TO COMPEL UNTIL THE COMPLIANCE
PERIOD IS OVER AND- A LONG TIME
SINCE I'VE DONE THESE THINGS BUT
IT SEEMS TO ME YOU HAVE TO GIVE
NOTICE. OF THAT YOU INTEND TO
FILE A MOTION IF THEY DON'T.
HOWEVER IT IS DIDN'T GET HIS HER
OR THEIR ACT TOGETHER AND GET
THE DOCUMENTS TO YOU SO. THAT
ALL TENDS TO DRAG OUT SO WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE TO SET THE- THE
TIME IN WHICH THE TOTALING
PERIOD BEGINS. AND MAYBE IT'S
THE- MAYBE IT'S THE POINT AT
WHICH THE MOTION TO COMPEL IS
FILED A MOTION TO QUASH IS
FILED- THEY'RE ALL SORTS OF
POINTS IN TIME BUT WE OUGHT TO.
PROBABLY SET IT BUT MAYBE MAYBE
THE DATE THAT THE SUBPOENAS
ACTUALLY SERVED. IS NOT
NECESSARILY THE RIGHT TIME WILL
HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND I LOOK
I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING.
FURTHER CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU
WELL AT THE MEDICAL BOARD. ABOUT
WHAT YOUR SITE IS AND CERTAINLY
CONVERSATIONS WITH THOSE.
OUTSIDE THE MEDICAL BOARD AS TO
WHAT THE WHAT THE THOUGHTS ARE
THEY HAVE AS TO WHEN WE SHOULD
START THE TOLLING PERIOD BUT
CLEARLY. IT HASSOME MERIT THERE
NEEDS TO BE SOME PRESSURE TO
EITHER COMPLY WITH THE SUBPOENA
GET A MOTION TO QUASH FILED IF
YOU DON'T WANT TO FILE IT I
DON'T WANT TO COMPLY COMPLY. AND
HAVE A COURT MAKE A
DETERMINATION ONE WAY OR THE
OTHER. SO ANYTHING ELSE
COLLEAGUES. LET'S MOVE ON TO-
ISSUE NUMBER. SEVEN SHOULD
REQUIREMENTS BECHANGED FOR
PETITIONERS SEEKING A
MODIFICATION TO THEIR PROBATION
TERMS RELATIONS SURE
REINSTATEMENT THE RECOVERABLE-
ISSUES HERE ONE OF WHICH IS A
COST RECOVERY IN TERMS OF. THESE
APPLICATIONS SO- MS LAWSON.
FORGERS THANK YOU AGAIN SENATOR
I THINK CURRENTLY BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION TWENTY
THREE ZERO SEVEN A DISCIPLINE
PLACES THE MAY PETITION THE
BOARD TO SEEK REINSTATEMENT OF A
RESULT WAS RENDERED LICENSE OUT
WILL HAVE THEIR PROBATION
MODIFIED TOGETHER PROBATION
MODIFIED OR TERMINATED EARLY THE
INDIVIDUAL THAT IS SEEKING TO
HAVE THEIR LICENSE BACK OR TO
HAVE THEIR PROBATION MODIFIED OR
TERMINATED MUST PROVE TO THE
BOARD THAT THEY HAVE BEEN
REHABILITATED BY CLEAR AND
CONVINCING EVIDENCE THE PROCESS
TO EVALUATE AND CONSIDER EACH
PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT OR
PROBATION- MODIFICATION INVOLVES
SUBSTANTIAL LEGAL COSTS TO THE
BOARD. FOR EXAMPLE IN FISCAL
YEAR TWENTY TWENTY ONE FOR
MILLION DOLLARS AND FEES PAID TO
THE ATTORNEY GNERAL'S OFFICE
AND THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS FOR LITIGATION EXPENSES
FOR THE PETITIONS FORMALLY
CONSIDERED BY ABOARD HANNAH THE
BOARD IS NOT ABLE TO RECOVER
THESE COSTS THROUGH ITS EXISTING
AUTHORITY AND THIS PERSON
CONTACT THE BOARD APPROVED ABOUT
HALF OF THE PETITIONS IT
RECEIVES AT AGAIN RECEIVE NO
REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE
SIGNIFICANT COSTS THAT BASIS
APPLICANTS SEEKING A LICENSE.
FEE IN ORDER FOR THEIR
APPLICATIONS TO BE REVIEWED AND
DISCIPLINE IT DISCIPLINE
PHYSICIANS ARE SUBJECT TO IN
ORDER TO REIMBURSE THE BOARD FOR
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH OUR
INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION
BUT THERE IS NO FINANCIAL COST
FOR AN INDIVIDUAL WHO ASK THE
BOARD TO CHANGE THE TERMS AND
THEIR PROBATION PORTUGAL FRANCE
A LICENSE REINSTATEMENT AS YOU
NOTED THE BOARD HAS PROPOSED A
COUPLE OF OPTIONS TO HELP
ADDRESS ITS COST AND ITS
WORKLOAD THE FIRST IS TO EXTEND
THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT SOMEONE
MUST WAIT BEFORE SUBMITTING A
PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT-
PENALTY RELIEF AND TO REQUIRE
WAITING LONGER THAN THE PREVIOUS
POSITION WAS DENIED. THE
REQUIRED MORE TIME AFTER THE
IMPOSITION OF DISCIPLINE IS
EXPECTED TO INCREASE THE
LIKELIHOOD THAT A PERSON HAS
BEEN REHABILITATED AND THE
SECONDOPTION IS TO REQUIRE.
THOSE INDIVIDUALS- AGAIN SEEKING
READ. WORK PANEL RELIEF TO PAY A
FEE TO OFFSET THE BOARD COSTS
THIS IS WITH. THESE BRITISH.
HAPPY TO ANY. HER YOU DONE OF
FOR PER. TO SO THE YOU'RE ABLE
OFFERS COMMENT ON THE NATURE AND
EXTENT OF THE APPLICATION FEE
THAT YOU WOULD BE ASSESSING OR
IS THAT TO BE DETERMINED IN THE
FUTURE. I BELIEVE THAT IS TO BE
DETERMINED THE FUTURE- BUT I
WILL ALSO DEFERRED SHOES TO
PACIFICA ON THAT QUESTION- LOS
IF I MAY INTERRUPT HELLO MY NAME
IS JENNA JONES SIGN THAT YOU
HAVE IN FORCE THAT THANK YOU FOR
THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK- WE
HAVE NOT MADE THOSE
DETERMINATIONS YET BUT WE WOULD
BE HAPPY TO AND WE PLAN TO WORK
ON THOSE THANK YOU. WELL THAT
ANSWERS THAT QUESTION. YOUR
BERMAN ANY QUESTIONS NOT FOR
THIS ONE. OKAY WELL THANK YOU
ALL I THINK THAT CONCLUDES AT
THIS POINT THE- MEDICAL BOARDS
PROPOSED REFORMS THAT WE HAVE ON
THE AGENDA FOR CONVERSATION. WE
DO HAVE THREE ITEMS ON OUR
AGENDA THAT WE ADDED ITEMS EIGHT
NINE AND TEN. THE AS I INDICATED
THE MEDICAL BOARD ITSELF- DID
NOT SPECIFICALLY GENERATE- BUT
THEY'RE ON THEIR FOR
CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION
BECAUSE THOSE WILL BE UNDER
CONSIDERATION AS WE MOVE FORWARD
INTO OUR EFFORTS NEXT YEAR. I
APPRECIATE THE MEDICAL BOARD
PANEL IS STAYING WITH US- AND
ANY OTHERS WHO WERE STILL ON THE
LINE TO. HELP US DISCUSS THESE
SPECIFIC ITEMS THE FIRST ONE
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS THIS
SHOULD THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA'S COMPLAINT
INVESTIGATION AND DISCIPLINARY
PROCESS INCLUDE COMPLAINANTS
PARTICIPATION AND IS IT TIME. TO
ESTABLISH A COMPLAINANT OR
VICTIM ADVOCATE IN THOSE CASES
WHERE THERE IS AN IDENTIFIED
COMPLAINANT OR VICTIM- IN THE
PROCESS. WE'VE HEARD ANECDOTALLY
INDIVIDUALS CALLED IN BUT TO
COMMITTEE COMMITTEE STAFF-
TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO- PREVENT PRESENT
A STATEMENT OR COMMENT. TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD OR PANELS OF THE
MEDICAL BOARD- AT VARIOUS POINTS
IN THE IN THE DISCIPLINARY
PROCESS SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN
INCLUDE THAT IN THE
CONVERSATION. THE VALUE OR NOT
OF THAT HOW THAT WOULD WORK
MECHANICALLY IF IT WORKS- SELF.
PERHAPS COULD YOU ALL. YOUR
BERMAN YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE
SOMETHING TO SAY PLEASE AYE AYE
I'LL JUST SAY I AM VERY
INTERESTED IN THIS IDEA- I
THINK- YOU KNOW MAKING A
COMPLAINT COMING FOR MAKING
COMPLAIN CAN BE VERY SCARY
THING- FOR VICTIMS COMPLAINTS
PATIENTS I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S
THE RIGHT WORD IS ADVOCATE OR
OMBUDSMAN OR JUST BUT MAKING
SURE THAT- THE PERSON.
UNDERSTANDS THE PROCESS
UNDERSTANDS THEIR RIGHTS.
UNDERSTANDS YOU KNOW WHERE THEY
DO PARTICIPATE MAYBE WHERE THEY
DON'T PARTICIPATE- KEEPING THEM
IN THE LOOP AS AS THE PROCESS
UNFOLDS SO THAT THEY'RE NOT
CAUGHT BY SURPRISE AND KIND OF-
YOU KNOW- IF. VICTIMIZES IN THE
RIGHT WORD BUT YOU KNOW THE
THROBBING CAUGHT BY SURPRISE BY
THINGS CAN BE VERY TRAUMATIZING
ALSO- TO HEAR THE COMPLAINTS
LAST VICTIM SO I JUST. JUST TO
START OFF THE CONVERSATION THIS
IS SOMETHING THAT I'M INTERESTED
IN THAT I THINK IF DONE RIGHT
CAN BE. VERY HELPFUL TO THE
VICTIMS AND- DEMYSTIFY THINGS
THAT CAN OFTEN BE VERY-
INTIMIDATING FOR FOLKS. LET ME
JUST SAY THAT THIS IS NOT A AN
OPPORTUNITY I'M NOT ASKING THE
MEDICAL BOARD TODAY. TO DEFEND
CURRENT PROCESS SEES- I JUST
WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A
CONVERSATION WITH YOU ABOUT HOW
IF THERE IS A WAY TO EXPAND THE
PROCESS BECAUSE- ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT CAME TO MIND DURING
THE VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WE'VE
HAD TOGETHER AT THE RIVER AND
HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS AND
LISTEN TO. PUBLIC COMMENT IS
SOME OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS
SEEMS TO BE COMING FROM. THE
DIRECTION THAT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW
WHAT'S GOING ON AND IT'S A
STRANGE PROCESS AND SOMETHING
HAPPENED TO THEM OR SOMETHING
HAPPENED TO SOMEONE CLOSE TO
THEM- OFTENTIMES TRAGIC- AND
THEY DON'T. KNOW WHAT THE
MEDICAL BOARD DID WHAT THE MORE
MEDICAL BOARD IS DOING IN THE
CASE OF CASE OF SITUATIONS WHERE
THERE IS STILL AN ONGOING
PROCESS AND OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE
CONFIDENTIALITY RULES WE HAVE
PRIVILEGE RULES WE HAVE
LITIGATION PROTECTION RULES WERE
YOU DON'T DISCUSS CASES ARE
ACTING ACTIVELY PUBLICATION BUT
ON THE OTHER HAND. WE HAVE
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE IN ESSENCE
PART OF YOUR PROCESS AND TO SOME
EXTENT CUSTOMERS ARE CLIENTS OF
YOUR PROCESS AND I LIKE TO TALK
ABOUT HOW WE CAN- APPS. OPEN IT
UP A LITTLE BIT CONSISTENT WITH
THE CONFIDENTIALITY RULES THAT
WE DEAL WITH. AND I JUST WENT
THROUGH AND MADE A LIST OF THE
VARIOUS LETTERS THAT. AND
TOUCHES THAT ARE MADE WITH
COMPLAINTS IS THE AS THE PROCESS
MOVES ON FROM THE INITIAL
KNOWLEDGE MINT LETTER TO. THE
LETTERS REGARDING THE RELEASE OF
MEDICAL RECORDS TO- NOTIFICATION
THAT MEDICAL RECORDS HAVE BEEN
RECEIVED LETTERS TO TALK ABOUT
THE CASE BEING FORWARD TO.
FORWARDED FOR FORMAL
INVESTIGATION- LETTERS HAVING TO
DO WITH CONTACT WITH
INVESTIGATORS LETTERS INDICATING
TO COMPLAIN THAT THAT THE MATTER
IS A BEEN REFERRED TO THE
ATTORNEY INTO OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL. AND ON AND ON
AND ON. HOW COULD WE IS THERE A
WAY TO OPEN THIS UP I GUESS.
ANYBODY WANT TO TAKE THAT.
FEDERAL MAKE IT HAS JUST STARTED
AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHAT THE
BOARD HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT
RECENTLY BECAUSE THIS IS AN AREA
THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
RIGHT OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
COMPLAINTS MAKING SURE THE
PUBLIC IS PROTECTED. AND ALSO
FEELS. LIKE THEY'RE PART OF OUR
PROCESS AND CAN PROVIDE INPUT IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT AND TO US
AND FRANKLY I THINK IT'S
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT- YEAH IT
JUST DEPENDS YOU KNOW PROVIDING
CONSUMER PROTECTION PUBLIC
PROTECTION IN CALIFORNIA SO JUST
WANT TO TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT WHAT THE BOARD AS A GROUP
DISCUSSED AT ITS FEBRUARY TENTH
AND ELEVENTH MEETING. AND WE
DISCUSSED THAT AND A RECOMMENDED
STAFF PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP- A
COMPLAINT IN THE AS ON UNIT AND
AGAIN THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE A
FORMAL TITLE AT THIS POINT BUT
THAT'S THE IDEA THAT WOULD
CONSIST OF A TEAM OF EMPLOYEES
WHO WHICH I COMPLAINTS THROUGH
THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS. THE
WAY I HAVE ENVISIONED THIS IS
ALMOST LIKE AND THE WAY THAT THE
VICTIM SERVICES UNIT WORK IN THE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICES THAT
ARE ACROSS CALIFORNIA. AND THIS
IS JUST A VERY PRELIMINARY IDEA
FROM THE BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE BUT
WE THINK THAT THE COMPLAIN
LIAISON UNIT FOR EXAMPLE COULD
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPORT AND
COMMUNICATION THE COMPLAINTS
THROUGHOUT THE DISCIPLINARY
PROCESS THINGS LIKE GUIDANCE ON
SUBMITTING AN EFFECTIVE
COMPLAINT WHICH INCLUDING YOUR
COMPLAINT. THE POINT OF CONTACT
IF THERE IS A POINT OF CONTACT
FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT COME UP
ALSO SUPPORT DURING INTERVIEWS
AND PROVIDING TESTIMONY AT
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND
OUTREACH TO THE PUBLIC MORE
BROADLY ABOUT WITH THE BOARD'S
PROCESS THESE AND LAWS AND ALSO-
JURISDICTION AND THERE'S A LOT
OF CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT ARE. AND
JURISDICTION IS SO- AT OUR LAST
MEETING THE BOARD DIRECTED OUR
STAFF TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE
PRACTICES OF OTHER STATE MEDICAL
BOARDS AND THOSE VICTIM
COMPENSATION AND SUPPORT UNITS
THAT ARE IN THE LOCAL DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS OFFICES. TO DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT THEIR INITIAL
TOOLS. OR PROCESS THESE USED IN
THOSE SETTINGS THAT WE COULD
APPLY HERE HEALTH- DID HEAR AND
- AS YOU ASSEMBLY MEMBER.
ADVENTURE THAT CONCEPT OF AN ON
BY I THAT THAT WAS PART OF THE
CENTER FOR IN LAWS DURING OUR
SON. REVIEW PROCESS AT LAST YEAR
THAT COURSE IS A- WELL SO THIS
ISN'T AS AND AREA THAT TOP MY-
FOR THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA AND WE LOOK FORWARD
TO CONTINUING TO WORK WITH ALL
OF YOU AND TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE
CAN IMPROVE OUR PROCESS EASIER
AND- REALLY MAKE THE EXPERIENCE
A BETTER ONE- FOR THE
COMPLAINTS. DO YOU INTEND TO.
PUT MEAT ON THE BONE AND SUBMIT
TO US A MORE DETAILED UP
PROPOSAL IN THAT REGARD I MEAN
I'VE I'M INTERESTED IN THIS. AS
WELL. IT OCCURRED TO ME IT
OCCURS TO ME THAT. VERTICALLY
ONCE THE CASES IN INVESTIGATION
PARTICULARLY WHERE WE IN SOME
CASES USE SWORN PEACE OFFICERS
AS INVESTIGATORS. EVEN CASES
WHERE THE INVESTIGATORS ARE NOT
SWORN- IF THE INVESTIGATOR IS
THE POINT OF CONTACT FOR THE
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS FILED THE
COMPLAINT OR- A VICTIM IF
THERE'S- IF IT'S A BOARD
INITIATED- INVESTIGATION THAT
THAT'S PROBABLY NOT THE SOFTEST
TOUCH- POSSIBLE WHEN YOU'RE
DEALING WITH SOMEONE WHO. MAY BE
FRAGILE CERTAINLY IS CONCERNED.
A WHOLE VARIETY OF EMOTIONS THAT
COME INTO PLAY IN THOSE CASES
AND WE PROBABLY CAN SET UP A
STRUCTURE WHERE SOMEONE CAN HELP
THE PERSON OR PERSONS NAVIGATE
YOUR PROCESS. AS YOU'VE
INDICATED- CHERILUS AND EXPLAIN
THE PROCESS DO SO IN A WAY IN
LANGUAGE THAT'S THAT'S
UNDERSTANDABLE ANYA AND
SENSITIVE- AND MAKE THIS A MORE
POSITIVE EXPERIENCE FOR THOSE
THAT. WHERE IT'S VERY VERY
DIFFICULT AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
IF YOUR ANSWER IS YES YOU'RE
GOING TO PUT THE MEAT ON THE
BONE AND SEND THE SOMETHING I
LOOK FORWARD TO TAKING A LOOK AT
THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD. YEAH
MAYBE IT MAYBE IF I CAN COME IN
THERE- JUST TO REASSURE THE
SENATOR THAT THIS IS A VERY HIGH
PRIORITY FOR THE BOARD- IT
INVOLVES TWO PARTS FIRST IS TO
LOOK AT OUR EXISTING PROCESSES.
TO ENSURE THAT THE REGULAR
COURSE OF INVESTIGATIONS- AT ALL
STAGES OF THE COMPLAINT THE
COMPLAINANT IS BETTER INFORMED
AND THIS INCLUDES MONITORING
WITH BERRIES COMMUNICATIONS AND
PROMPT SHOULD BE MAY AS WELL AS
WE'RE WORKING ON ACTUALLY A
COMPLAINANT. TRACKING SO THAT
COMPLAINANTS CAN ACCESS THE
PROGRESS OF THEIR COMPLAINT.
ELECTRONICALLY WE THINK THIS
WILL GO SOME WAY TO BRIDGING THE
INFORMATION GAP. BUT THE SECOND
PART OF IT IS AGAIN WHAT WE'RE
DEVELOPING NOW SORT OF
COMPLAINANT. LIAISON UNIT. IT'S
AN EMBRYONIC STAGE WE WILL BE
REPORTING TO THE BOARD ON IT WE
BELIEVE IN A MORE COMPREHENSIVE
WAY AT THE AUGUST FOURTH
MEETING. AND FOR THE REASONS
THAT YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED. WHAT
WE IN THE VINTAGE IT DEVELOPING
INTO IS A DEDICATED UNIT. WITH
IN- THE MEDICAL BOARD WITH A
DIFFERENT SKILL SET. THAN THE-
THAN THE CURRENT- INVESTIGATORS
AND THEY ARE THERE TO GIVE
SUPPORT TO COMPLAIN AND- IN WHAT
IS SOMETIMES A VERY. UNFAMILIAR
AND POTENTIALLY INTIMIDATING
PROCESS. OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
DO AS WELL. IS TO BETTER
COMMUNICATE. TO THE PUBLIC. YOU
KNOW WHAT OUR ROLE IS WHAT
ARCHERS IS INTERBEDDED
EXPECTATIONS- WE DON'T GIVE
AWARDS. AS YOU KNOW WE HAVE A
VERY SPECIFIC ROLE WHICH IS TO
LOOK AT PUBLIC PROTECTION FROM
THE LAND OF FITNESS TO PRACTISE.
AND SO WE HAVE TO BETTER EXPLAIN
WHAT IT IS WE'RE DOING BUT THIS
IS A HIGH PRIORITY AND JUST TO
ANSWER YOUR QUESTION VERY. THANK
LAKE YES WE WILL BE PUTTING MORE
CONCRETE PROPOSALS AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ON
THIS. THAT SOUNDS GREAT. YES
SENATOR ROB IF I COULD JUST- IT
TAKE A MOMENT TO EMPHASIZE AND I
KNOW THIS. HEARING IS FOCUSED ON
ENFORCEMENT- BUT WE DO NEED A
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
SUFFICIENT FUNDING WE DO NEED.
TO BE ABLE TO PAY OUR EMPLOYEES
TO DO THIS GOOD WORK. ON BEHALF.
OF ALL CALIFORNIANS AND SO WE DO
HAVE A FEW PROPOSAL I KNOW
THAT'S NOT A TOPIC OF.
CONVERSATION TODAY BUT THAT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US BEING
ABLE TO ACHIEVE OUR MISSION. WE
INTEND TO WE INTEND TO MOVE OUT.
ON THAT I HAVE A LARGER ISSUE
WITH. A POINT OF DISCUSSION WITH
THE ADMINISTRATION ON GENERAL
FUND SUPPORT FOR- BOARDS THAT WE
TELL PEOPLE THEY NEED TO BE
LICENSED AND- THEN WE TELL
PEOPLE WE HAVE TO SET UP A BOARD
TO. LICENSE YOU AND FORCE YOU
AND THEN WE TELL PEOPLE OF BY
THE WAY. YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR THE
BOARD THAT WE'VE JUST TOLD YOU
YOU HAVE TO BE LICENSED BY AND
ENFORCED BY. SO I THINK THERE'S
A- THERE'S A LOT CAR. BUT I'M
SURE THAT'S FOR ANOTHER DAY AND
FRANKLY WILL PROBABLY BE. SOME
PLACE PASSED TWO THOUSAND TWENTY
FOUR WHEN I'M IN ANOTHER
LIFETIME SO WE ARE GOING TO
ADDRESS THIS THE PROPOSAL IN THE
FEE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF- AND
WILL DO SO ASAP. THANK YOU. OKAY
ANYTHING ELSE ON ITEM NUMBER
EIGHT SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT
AND LOOK FORWARD TO. HAVING ALL
OF A STEP OUT AND TRY TO
IMPROVE- COMPLAINANT IN VICTIM
PARTICIPATION- IN THIS PROCESS
LET'S GO TO OUR ISSUE NUMBER
NINE WHICH IS TO THE LEGISLATURE
. AND THEN PUBLIC NEED
ADDITIONAL ACCESS TO MEDICAL
BOARD OF CALIFORNIA DISCIPLINARY
CASE RESULTS INCLUDING THE
NATURE OF THE INITIAL COMPLAINT
LEADING TO INVESTIGATION FACTS
OF THE CASE DISAPPOINTING
PROPOSED. AND RATIONALE FOR
SPECIFIC DISCIPLINE. THIS IS NOT
YOUR ISSUE- BUT IT'S AN ISSUE
YOU'VE HEARD ME ASK IT BEFORE
AND I HAVE TO CONFESS THAT- I
FULLY RESPECT THE
CONFIDENTIALITY OF INDIVIDUAL
CASES- BUT I'M SOMEWHAT
FRUSTRATED IN NOT COMPLETELY
UNDERSTANDING. HOW THE PROCESS
WORKS AND HOW SOME CASES MANY
CASES ARE SETTLED AND HOW SOME
CASES ARE SETTLED FOR. A PUBLIC
REPRIMAND FOR EXAMPLE WHEN
YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE
DISCIPLINARY GUIDANCE IT WOULD
APPEAR THAT- OF A DIFFERENT SORT
OF DISCIPLINE- WAS CALLED FOR- I
REALIZE THAT EVERY CASE IS
DIFFERENT. AND THAT THERE ARE
THINGS THAT DRIVE DECISIONS THAT
. PERHAPS I CAN'T KNOW HOW HOW
CAN WE IMPROVE THE LEGISLATURE'S
OVERSIGHT OVER THE BOARD MEDICAL
BOARD'S DISCIPLINARY PROCESS SO
WE GET A BETTER HANDLE ON WHY
CASES ARE SETTLED. BY SPECIFIC
TYPES OF CASES NOT DOCTOR JONES
OR DR SAMUELS BUT WHY SPECIFIC
TYPES OF CASES ARE SETTLED WHY.
MANY OF THE CASES SEEM TO
DEVIATE THE POLICE TO US FROM
THE PUBLISHED DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES SO WE CAN EVALUATE
WHAT OBSTACLES OCCUR WHAT.
PROVISIONS OF THE MEDICAL
PRACTICE ACT MIGHT DRIVE
PARTICULAR DECISIONS. BECAUSE AT
THIS POINT OTHER THAN TALKING TO
YOU ALL AND I TRUST EVERYONE OF
YOU. BUT IT'S HARD FOR ME TO GET
MY ARMS AROUND IT AND I'VE SAID
LAWYERS MAKE TERRIBLE
LEGISLATORS AND THERE'S A REASON
FOR THAT. SO THAT'S MY SPEECH ON
ISSUE. ISSUE NUMBER NINE AT CHET
. CHEERS ROB AND I ARE STAFF MAY
HAVE- SOME COMMENTS HERE AS WELL
AND THIS IS A COMPLICATED ISSUE
RIGHT BECAUSE THE BOARD IS AN
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY AND THE
BOARD HAD ALSO THE FED BOARD AS
A WHOLE ACT IN A QUASI JUDICIAL
CAPACITY RIGHT- WHEN MAKING
DECISIONS. AND IT'S I THINK ONE
OF THE THINGS ARE ONE OF THE
WAYS THAT WE MAY MIGHT BE ABLE
TO PROVIDE YOU ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION IS THROUGH YOU KNOW
DEVELOPING AGGREGATED REPORTS
THAT MIGHT AND SHED SOME LIGHT
ON CERTAIN TYPES OF CASES AND
PARTICULAR OUTCOMES. AND I DO
THINK IT WOULD BE COMPLICATED
AND FRANKLY DIFFICULT- IT TOOK
TO HAVE THE LEGISLATURE- OR
OTHERS SOMEHOW INVOLVED ARE
PRIVY TO THAT CERTAIN. AB COFFIN
DELIBERATIONS. A BOARD MEMBERS
THAT ARE BEYOND THE PUBLIC
RECORD AND YOU JUST AGAIN AS ANY
YOU KNOW CERTAIN EXAMPLE OF. THE
PROCESS YOU KNOW WHEN WE NEED IN
OUR DISCIPLINARY PANELS AND
RECEIVE. LEGAL ADVICE- WE
RECEIVE- MY PRIVILEGED ADVICE
FROM OUR LAWYERS WE RECEIVE.
YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON
WHERE THE EVIDENCE IS YOU KNOW
TAKE IN- A PARTICULAR CASE AND.
LEGISLATURE AB AT THE BOARD'S
DECISION MAKING PROCESS I THINK
COULD REALLY JEOPARDIZE FUTURE
AND DISCIPLINARY ACTION IT ALSO
COULD POTENTIALLY- RELEASE WE
ARE VERY HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION ABOUT PATIENTS. AND
THAT COULD HARM ALL PARTIES
INVOLVED SO I THINK THIS IS A
COMPLICATED ISSUE I THINK THAT
PERHAPS THE BEST I CAN OFFER YOU
TODAY IS THAT. WE DO HAVE A
VARIETY OF EXISTING DATA STREAMS
I THINK MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR YOU
TO REVIEW ABOUT OUR CASES- BUT
GETTING INTO THOSE SORT OF
BEHIND CLOSED DOORS PANEL
DISCUSSIONS WERE ACTING AND THAT
WAS A JUDICIAL CAPACITY I JUST
THINK IT'S GOING TO BE- YOU KNOW
POTENTIALLY HARMFUL. TO THE
PUBLIC AND REALLY CONTRARY TO
THE BOARD'S CONSUMER PROTECTION
INTERESTS I'M JUST WONDERING IF
YOU YOU KNOW YOU YOU YOU KNOW
PHYSICIAN A- OF. OUR POSITION A
ENGAGED AND BLAH BLAH BLAH-
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINE.
SUSPENSION RESULT PUBLIC
REPRIMAND. RATIONALE. EXPERT
WITNESS YOU KNOW EXPERT WITNESS
DECLINED TO SUPPORT CONNECTION
TO- MEDICAL PRACTICE- THAT WOULD
BE HELPFUL BECAUSE THAT I
UNDERSTAND THE INTER I THINK I
UNDERSTAND THE ATTORNEY CLIENT
PRIVILEGE ISSUE BUT OF COURSE
WHEN THE BOARD MAKES A DECISION
IT'S THE BOARD'S DECISION
BECAUSE I WOULD ASSUME IN SOME
CASES YOU ACCEPT THE ATTORNEY'S
RECOMMENDATION IN SOME CASES YOU
DON'T SO. IT'S HARD IT'S NOT THE
ATTORNEY'S DECISION IT'S THE
BOARD'S DECISION SO THE ACTUAL
DECISION ITSELF. IF YOU CUT ALL
THE PERSONAL IDENTIFYING
INFORMATION OUT. BECOMES THE
BOARD'S DECISION. AND THERE'S
PROBABLY A SUMMARIZED REASON FOR
CHOOSING. DISCIPLINE ACTION A.
AS OPPOSED TO DISCIPLINE ACTION
BE AND HOWEVER THAT INFORMATION
IS PROVIDED THAT MIGHT BE
HELPFUL TO US IN UNDERSTANDING.
AND DEALING WITH THE CRITICISM-
THAT YOU RECEIVE AND WE RECEIVED
AS WELL FOR NOT TAKING ACTION.
OF IN TERMS OF THE MEDICAL BOARD
PROCESS YEAH THAT MAKES SENSE IT
IT IT DOES MAKE SENSE- AND BUT
LIKE- I THINK IT WAS THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE- MENTIONED IN
RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTIONS OF
THEM. IT REALLY IS NEVER THAT
STRAIGHTFORWARD RIGHT OR IT'S
NOT THAT LINEAR IT'S NOT USUALLY
THAT THERE'S ONE RATIONALE
REASON FOR ANY PARTICULAR
OUTCOME. AND YOU KNOW I KNOW
THAT YOU'RE FAMILIAR THAT OUR
PROCESS OFTEN INCLUDES A%
MEMORANDUM THAT COME FROM THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE AND
THOSE CAN BE QUITE LENGTHY RIGHT
AND TALKING THROUGH. ALL OF THE
FACTORS THAT THE BOARD PANELS
AND CONSIDER IN MAKING A
DETERMINATION ABOUT AND YOU KNOW
IT CAN TAKE YOUR OUTCOME OF THE
CASE I WOULD ALSO CAUTION THAT
THAT TYPE OF INFORMATION. COULD
POTENTIALLY BE USED. BY THE
DEFENSE BAR BY ATTORNEYS FOR
LICENSEES THAT COULD COMPILE
REVIEW THOSE REPORTS AND USE
THAT AND FRANKLY TO OBTAIN THE
MOST FAVORABLE OUTCOME FROM
THEIR PERSPECTIVE FOR THEIR
CLIENTS WHICH COULD BE POSSIBLY
CONTRARY TO THE BOARD'S CONSUMER
PROTECTION INTEREST SO. YEAH BOB
AND INTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT
COULD BE- ONE FOR EXAMPLE OF
SORT OF OPENING THAT PROCESS.
OUT FURTHER IN. I INTO IT YOU'VE
GOT- YOU KNOW IT IS. COMMENTS
FOR THE I WOULD SAY I WOULD
NOTICE IF THE STATE TO
STATISTICS ARE. IF YOU'RE ONLY
TALKING ABOUT 18220% OF THE
CASES BECAUSE THE REST OF THEM
THE RESULTS SEEM PRETTY
FAVORABLE AND I CAN'T IMAGINE
ANYBODY. USING THOSE RATHER
FAVORABLE RESULTS AGAINST THE
BOARD IN FUTURE CASES SO IT
WOULD BE THAT 18220% THAT
ESSENTIALLY GOES BEYOND. THE
STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AND THAT
RESULTS IN EITHER A PUBLIC
REPRIMAND OR- SOME LESSER FORM
OF DISCIPLINE I DON'T KNOW I'M
JUST TRYING TO RIGHT NOW WE
DON'T HAVE A CLUE. AS TO WHAT
HAPPENS OTHER THAN. SOMEBODY
TELLS US THAT 80% OF THE CASES
ARE STIPULATED SETTLEMENTS AND-
WE HEAR ANECDOTAL INFORMATION
THAT MANY OF THOSE ARE PUBLIC
REPRIMANDS AND THEN WE APPLY
THAT INFORMATION TO THE- TO THE
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINES IN THE
CCR. AND DOESN'T SEEM TO ME TO
TEST AND WE DON'T KNOW WHY AND
SO. I GUESS IF THAT'S WHERE
WE'RE LEFT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
LEFT WITH THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LEFT
WITH AND- WILL CONTINUE TO BUT
I'D LIKE TO KEEP A CONVERSATION
ABOUT HOW WE COULD. HAVE A
LITTLE BIT MORE VISIBILITY OVER
THE- OVER THE OUTCOME OF THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS WITHOUT.
DISCLOSING OR REVEALING ANY
PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
INCLUDING THE NAME OF THE
PHYSICIAN THE NAME OF THE
PATIENT THE LOCATION. ANYTHING
ELSE ANYBODY WANTS TO CARVE OUT
BECAUSE IT WOULD SEEM TO ME FOR
OUR PURPOSES THE ONLY THING
THAT'S RELEVANT. IS THE
ALLEGATION. THE FACTS THAT WERE
FOUND GENERALLY. THAT
SPECIFICALLY AND THE
DISCIPLINARY OUTCOME AS MEASURED
AGAINST WHAT THE STANDARD IS AND
IF THERE IS ANY EXPLANATION FOR
THE DIFFERENCE YEAH AND CENTER
OF I THINK THAT THIS IS HERE
FRANKLY IT'S RELATED TO. THE
ISSUE WE'RE JUST DISCUSSING
PREVIOUSLY YEAH THE IDEA OF A
COMPLAINT LIAISON UNIT FOR
EXAMPLE I DON'T THINK THAT THESE
ARE ARE ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES
BECAUSE I DO THINK IF WE IMPROVE
THAT. PROCESS AND HELP PEOPLE.
LAYTON'S THE LEGISLATURE OTHERS
BETTER UNDERSTAND OUR OUR
PROCESS THESE WISER DECISIONS
ARE MADE AT WHAT POINT TIME
CERTAIN DECISIONS ARE MADE THAT
ACTUALLY MIGHT HELP IMPROVE
CONFIDENCE IN UNDERSTANDING- AND
UNDERSTANDING IN OUR PROCESS
EASIER I THINK THESE. IDEAS ARE
AND OUR LEGS YEAH IF YOU WELL I
CERTAINLY AGREE. YOU KNOW IF THE
CONSUMERS ARE HAPPY THEN I GUESS
AND THE PATIENTS ARE HAPPY THEN
I GUESS WE'RE HAPPY RIGHT SO.
FOR THE MOST PART COLLEAGUES ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS I SEE NONE SO
LET'S MOVE ON TO- THE TOPIC THAT
WE VISITED BEFORE IN A VARIETY
OF WAYS AND THAT'S ISSUE NUMBER
TEN WHAT'S THE ACTUAL ROLE OF
THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA
BOARD MEMBERS AND THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS BECAUSE-
THINK THERE'S SOME PERHAPS A
MISUNDERSTANDING OUT THERE. IN
THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS TO HOW
BOARD MEMBERS ARE INVOLVED WHEN
THEY'RE INVOLVED AND IN WHAT
FORM AND FASHION AND THEN WHAT
BENEFIT WOULD BE ACHIEVED BY
ADDING ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC TO THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA THE PUBLIC MEMBER
OPTION. SPECIFICALLY IN REGARDS
TO THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS AND
I WILL NOTE. THAT YOU KNOW SO
GOES THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA SHOWS SO GO SO SHOULD
GO. THE OTHER HEALTH CARE
BOARDS- THAT ARE THAT ARE
SOMEWHAT RELATED BECAUSE WE HAVE
THE SAME. PUBLIC MEMBER ISSUE.
THERE AS WELL. SO WITH THAT WHO
WANTS TO TAKE IT AWAY. WHAT I
CAN TO SPEAK BRIEFLY TO THAT YOU
KNOW MY PERSPECTIVE AS A BOARD
MEMBER AND- SHARES OF WHAT OUR
ROLE IS IN THE DISCIPLINARY
PROCESS I MEAN REALLY I DAY TO
DAY BASIS WERE PROVIDING
OVERSIGHT. TO OUR MEDICAL BOARD
STAFF- AS YOU'VE HEARD YEAH
CONDUCTS THE INVESTIGATIONS
WORKS WITH THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE AND THEY'LL TO
THE LEAGUE BRINGS. THE CASE IS
ALSO REALLY COME TO THE MEDICAL
BOARD FOR FINAL RESOLUTION- BUT
AGAIN ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. ALL
OF THAT WORK IS DELEGATED TO THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ADD TO CARRY
OUT THE BOARD POLICY ADVOCATES
ALSO YOU KNOW UNDER UNDER
STATUTE WE DO HAVE TO AVOID
CONFLICTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS AND
WE HAVE TO BE NEUTRAL DECISION
MAKERS AND THE PROCESS AGAIN THE
ACTING OF FATHER JUDICIAL
CAPACITY. AND OUR ROLE AS BOARD
MEMBERS- AND SO WE'RE YOU KNOW
WE'RE WE'RE NEUTRAL DECISION
MAKERS WE HAVE TO AVOID- ANY
ABUSES OF THE PROCESS WE CAN'T
GET INVOLVED IN. THE
INVESTIGATION FOR THOSE SORTS OF
THINGS JUST LIKE A SUPERIOR
COURT JUDGE FOR EXAMPLE IS NOT
INVOLVED IN A- CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATION. I DON'T KNOW
WOULD YOU AT BE WILLING DISTRICT
TALKED IN THE STASHED YEARS
LEGAL BASIS FOR THE BOARD
MEMBERS ROLE. AS WELL AB HELPED
WILL. YEAH JUST TO RECAP WHAT
MISS LOS SAYS THE THERE'S A
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
SECTION TWO THREE THREE FIVE
SUBDIVISION SEE TO THAT
PROHIBITS OF AS- MEDICAL BOARD
INDIVIDUAL WHO'S BEEN INVOLVED
IN THE COMPLAINT OR
INVESTIGATION STAGE FROM
PARTICIPATING IN THE DECISION
MAKING STAGE AND THERE'S A VERY
GOOD REASONS FOR THAT. YOU
WOULDN'T WANT BOARD MEMBERS TO
YOU INFLUENCE WHAT COMPLAINTS GO
FORWARD AND WHICH ONES DON'T-
AND WHAT. IT INVESTIGATION IS
CONDUCTED BECAUSE THOSE ITEMS IF
IT GOES TO HEARING MAY NOT EVEN
BE ADMISSIBLE- SO YOU COULD HAVE
A BOARD MEMBER AWARE OF THE
COMPLAINT AGAINST SAID PHYSICIAN
THAT WASN'T ABLE TO BE PROVEN-
AND FACTOR THAT IN TO THE
DISCIPLINARY ACTION THAT'S NOT
CONSISTENT WITH DUE PROCESS AND
IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH A HAVE
A BOARD CONDUCTS ITS BUSINESS-
IT. SO THE I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER
FOR THE QUESTION. JUST OKAY WELL
LET ME LET ME MAYBE I CAN ASK
ONE SO WHAT WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT MUCH EARLIER IN ONE OF THE
OTHER ISSUES AS TO. HAVE AN
ENTRY STANDARDS IN WHICH HOW FAR
TO PURSUE AN INVESTIGATION AND
WHETHER THEY'RE WEIRD OFF RAMPS
FOR AN INVESTIGATION AND LOOK
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET TO THE
POINT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE
ABLE TO CHARGE. WHATEVER IT IS
THAT WOULD BRING ABOUT A
REVOCATION AND LET'S LET'S GO
WITH THE FAILURE TO PRODUCE
RECORDS AND THE FAILURE TO
DISCLOSE- A MISDEMEANOR
CONVICTION. WHETHER OR NOT
THAT'S PREPONDERANCE OF THE
EVIDENCE OR CLEAR AND
CONVINCING. THAT WOULD NEVER BE
IN FRONT OF A BOARD MEMBER
BECAUSE THAT WOULD VIOLATE- MS
WEBB WHAT YOU'VE JUST SPOKEN
ABOUT. RIGHT YEAH. AT ELEVEN
SORRY AND I'M NOT SURE I TOTALLY
FOLLOWED WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WHAT
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW YOU
WHO WOULD MAKE THE DECISION TO
SAY. WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH A
LESSER OFFENSE ITS PREPONDERANCE
OF THE EVIDENCE LET'S NOT WASTE
ANY MORE RESOURCES ON EXPERTS
INVESTIGATION LET'S MOVE
FORWARD. THAT WOULDN'T NOT BE
DONE BY BOARD MEMBERS BECAUSE
THAT WOULD VIOLATE EXACTLY WHAT
YOU'VE- BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT
WOULD REQUIRE THE BOARD MEMBER
TO MAKE A DECISION ON AN
INVESTIGATION MATTER WHICH BOARD
MEMBERS ARE PRECLUDED FROM DOING
AS THEY ARE THE DECISION MAKERS.
THAT'S CORRECT OKAY THEN LET ME
ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION THAT I
SHOULD HAVE ASKED EARLIER ON THE
COMPLAINT OF PARTICIPATION PIECE
. SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE
GET FROM- PATIENTS CONSUMERS
CLIENTS. OF YOURS- IS THEY'D
LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS
THE BOARD MEMBERS DURING THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS MUCH LIKE-
THEY TELL ME I DIDN'T
PARTICIPATE IN. IN A- STELLAR
CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL COURT YOU
WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HAVE VICTIMS
COMMAND. AND MAKE A VICTIM
STATEMENT. TO THE DECISION MAKER
PRIOR TO THE DECISION BEING MADE
. ONE IS THAT POSSIBLE AND AT
WHAT STAGE WOULD THAT HAPPEN.
YES THE THINGS IN OUR OFFENSE TO
CURRENT LIFE AND- PROHIBITS
STATEMENTS BEING PROVIDED TO THE
DISCIPLINARY PANELS OF THE
MEDICAL BOARD. FOR THEIR
CONSIDERATION WHEN DISCIPLINING
LICENSEES TO THAT SORT OF DIRECT
INTERACTION WITH THE PANELS AT
THE AT THE END OF THE PROCESS
COMPLAINS. ALREADY DO THEY PLAY
A VALUABLE ROLE IN THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS BY FRIDAY
HE- EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY AND
YOU KNOW SOMETIMES THAT OCCURS
RIGHT AND PROVIDING TESTIMONY AT
THE ADMINISTRATIVE- HEARING IN
FRONT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JUDGE- BUT YOUR COMPLAINTS ARE
NOT. PARTIES FROM A LEGAL
STANDPOINT TO THE DISCIPLINARY
ACTION THE BOARD IS ATTEMPTING
TO TAKE IF THE LICENSEE RIGHT
THAT THE PARTIES ARE THE MEDICAL
FOR CALIFORNIA AND THEN THE
LICENSEE WHICH IS. DIFFERENT
THAN IN THE CONTEXT OF A MEDICAL
MALPRACTICE IS CIVIL CASE
ALLEGING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE-
RIGHT BUT YOU KNOW THE BOARD HAS
A SEPARATE AND- THEIR SEPARATE
STANDING IF YOU WILL- IN AMERICA
MORE CASE SO ANY STATEMENT THAT
IS PROVIDED BY COMPLAIN IS
TREATED AS EVIDENCE- AND ARE
PROCEEDING. AS CONSIDER ALONG
WITH ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT
IS OBTAINED BY THE BOARD DURING
ITS INVESTIGATION. CURRENTLY A
SUMMARY IS THAT STATEMENT IN AND
OF COURSE OF THE OTHER EVIDENCES
WHILE IS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD
MEMBERS WHEN WE ARE MAKING OUR
DETERMINATIONS ABOUT HOW TO
DISCIPLINE AT ANY INDIVIDUAL
PHYSICIAN. LIKE I SAID CURRENT
LAW DOES. PROHIBIT THOSE STAY
FROM BEING PER TO THE THAT
HANDLES FOR THEIR- WHEN
DISCIPLINING LICENSEE IT'S THIS
IS A COMPLICATED DUE PROCESS
ISSUE I THINK- SO PROVIDING A
COMPLAIN STATEMENT WITHOUT
STATEMENT IS CONSIDERED EVIDENCE
IN OUR PROCESS WITHOUT ALLOWING
AT THE CROSS EXAMINATION IF YOU
WILL- COULD VIOLATE THE DUE
PROCESS RIGHTS OF. OUR LICENSEES
AND IT COULD SUBJECT OUR BOARD
DECISIONS TO A JUDICIAL
CHALLENGE STEP OUT LIKE A LOT OF
THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY
AND THIS IS A COMPLICATED- A
COMPLICATED ISSUE WELL RIGHT AND
THEN THE CRIMINAL CONTEXT THE AS
I RECALL THE VICTIM STATEMENT
DOES NOT COMMIT UNTIL AFTER THE
CONVICTION THAT THE THAT IT
COMES IN AT THE POINT OF.
SENTENCING AT LEAST THAT'S BEEN
MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE IN THAT
FORUM. AND IT'S A SLIGHTLY
DIFFERENT SITUATION. HERE WHERE
THE BOARD MEMBERS. A PANEL OF
BOARD MEMBERS THE IS ACTUALLY
MAKING. FACTUAL DETERMINATIONS
YOU'RE MAKING DECISIONS- IF I
REMEMBER CORRECTLY HE SAID RIGHT
CHERILUS AND- THAT'S THE THAT'S
THE REASON WHY THERE'S A DUE
PROCESS ISSUE EXACTLY ANYWHERE
THE ULTIMATE DECISION MAKER
RIGHT- AT. THE END OF THE
PROCESS AND MINISTRY OF LAW
JUDGE OR YOU KNOW. IT DEPENDS
ON- WHAT PATH THESE CASES TAKE
TO GET TO THE- INDIVIDUAL
DISCIPLINARY PANELS. YES WELL
THERE'S CLEARLY INTEREST IN THIS
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CONTINUE
TO LOOK INTO IT I DIED. I'M
GOING TO APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY ON THAT PARTICULAR
ISSUE TO HAVE CONTINUED
CONVERSATIONS WITH. WITH YOU ALL
TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO
ACCOMMODATE TO. THE INTERESTS OF
THOSE WHO. F. ARE INVOLVED IN
YOUR PROCESS AS COMPLAINANTS AND
VICTIMS IN WHERE THAT
INVOLVEMENT COULD BE WITHOUT
JEOPARDIZING THE DUE PROCESS OF
THE- RIGHTS OF THE PHYSICIANS
INVOLVED IN. SOME YOU KNOW I
COULD SEE SOME OF IT MAY BE
RELEVANT AT SOME POINT IN TIME
BUT NOT PARTICULARLY RELEVANT TO
YOUR DECISION- AT OTHER POINTS
IN THE PROCESS SO WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE TO WORK THROUGH THAT. AND
LIKE BILLS THAT EARLIER LIKE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BERMAN SAID
ANYTHING IN THIS IS THE AREA AS
IT'S OF GREAT INTEREST TO THE
BOARD HOW WE CAN IMPROVE OUR
RELATIONSHIP AND DEVELOP PROCESS
IMPROVEMENTS THAT WILL REALLY
HELP CONSUMERS AND HELP THOSE
CONSUMERS WHO ACTUALLY FOLLOW
THROUGH FILED COMPLAINTS WITH US
AS WELL SO AGAIN THANK YOU HAVE
A PRELIMINARY IDEA THAT THE
BOARD STAFF HAS DEVELOPED- YOU
KNOW ONLINE TO THIS COMPLAINT
LIAISON YOU KNOW WE'RE
DISCUSSING BEFORE I THINK THESE
ARE ALL. REALLY IMPORTANT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO IMPROVE
PROCESS THESE AND ENSURE THAT
THAT COMPLAINTS FEEL LIKE THEY
HAVE A HARD IN A VOICE IN THAT
PROCESS TO WORK COMMITTED TO
CONTINUING THAT WORK TO YOU
KNOW. COME UP WITH BETTER IDEAS-
ENHANCED STAFF TRAINING AS WELL-
AND AGAIN JUST DEVELOP BETTER
PROCESS SEES THE COMPLAINS AT
FIELD AND ARE MORE INVOLVED IN
OUR PROCESS YOU KNOW I KNOW I
SPEAK FOR MY COLLEAGUES WE
REALLY APPRECIATE THAT WE
APPRECIATE YOUR INVOLVEMENT- IN
ALL ASPECTS OF THIS HEARING THE
ISSUES THAT ARE LISTED ON THE
AGENDA AND- LOOK FORWARD TO
CONTINUING TO WORK WITH YOU ALL.
OF VERY ROBUST THE DISCUSSION
I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
MORE I LOOK FORWARD TO THOSE AS
WELL- IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE
LET'S MOVE ON TO COMMENTS FROM
OUR MEDICAL COMMUNITY WERE
JOINED TODAY BY DENIS CUEVAS
ROMERO LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE WITH
THE CALIFORNIA. MEDICAL
ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU FOR US.
THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR REALLY
APPRECIATE BOB AND- CHERUB
CHAMBER CENTER CENTER REALLY-
ENGAGING- THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE CMA'S
PERSPECTIVE ON HOW THE MEDICAL
BOARD'S PROPOSED STATUTORY
CHANGES CAN AFFECT OUR NEARLY
FIFTY THOUSAND MEMBERS I WANT TO
THANK YOUR STAFF FOR THE
THOUGHTFUL BACKGROUND PAPER AND
ALWAYS BEING WILLING TO ENGAGE
ON THESE CHALLENGING AND COMPLEX
ISSUES- ALSO WANT TO THANK THE
STAFF FOR THE MEDICAL SUPPORT
FOR PROPOSING THESE CHANGES AS
WE BELIEVE WE HAVE SHARED GOALS
AND PARKS. PROTECTING CONSUMERS
PROVIDING CLEAR GUIDANCE
REGULATIONS FAR LICENSEES AND
INCREASING TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE BENEFIT
OF ALL STAKEHOLDERS I'LL BRIEFLY
COMMENT ON SOME OF THE VARIOUS
STATUTORY AND POLICY CHANGES
ADDRESSED- IN THIS AREA I'M I'M
GONNA GO SLIGHTLY OUT OF ORDER
IF YOU HUMOR ME MISS MISTER
CHAIR- ALL START WITH ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN MODIFYING THE
PROBATION TERMS AND LICENSE
REINSTATEMENT- HILLS CMA
UNDERSTANDS THAT CHANGES
REQUESTED BY THE MEDICAL BOARD-
YOU KNOW WE'VE HAD BRIEF
CONVERSATIONS ON THESE ISSUES
CMA WOULD LIKELY SUPPORT- OF
COURSE WITHOUT SEEING ANY
LANGUAGE- THE BOARD'S PROPOSED
OPTION FOR CREATING A SPECIFIED
FEE TO COVER THE REASONABLE COST
FOR COMPLETING THE SERVICES FOR
PETITIONERS- CMA IS WORKING TO
ENSURE THAT POSITIONS THAT HAVE
SURRENDERED. OR HAVE HAD THEIR
LICENSE REVOKED DUE TO EGREGIOUS
CONDUCT SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO RE
ENTRY THE RE ENTER THE
PROFESSION- YOU'LL YOU'LL LIKELY
SEE DOCTOR MEMBERS AB THIRTEEN
AT SIXTEEN THIRTY SIX SOON- IF
THERE ARE OTHER STATUTORY
HURDLES THAT THE BOARD FACES
CMA'S OPEN TO HAVING FURTHER
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE LEGISLATURE
ONBOARD- LOOKING TO ITEM NUMBER
FIVE REGARDING THE MANDATORY
REPORTING BY HEALTH FACILITIES.
YOU KNOW CMA CERTAINLY- OPEN AT
TATTY ADDITIONAL REPORTING
ENTITIES FOR COMPLAINTS OF
ALLEGED. SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WHILE
REMAINING CONSISTENT WITH WITH
CURRENT LAW OUR ORGANIZATION
WANTS TO MAKE CLEAR THAT
LICENSEES THAT COMMIT THIS TYPE
OF MISCONDUCT. AND ARE CONVICTED
FOR SUCH JUST KIND I. READ THE
TRUCK WITHIN THE- AND SHOULD NO
CLUE IN THE MAIL PROFESSION. I'M
WILL JUST BRIEFLY MAY WE ARE
SLIGHTLY CONCERNED WITH THE
NATURE OF ATTY NORMANDY STATUTES
TO REQUIRE ANY ORGANIZATION THAT
EMPLOYS A LICENSEE TO REPORT-
BOOK TO THE BOARD ANY EMPLOYMENT
DISAPPEAR LATER DISCIPLINE-
EMPLOYMENT RECORDS ARE USUALLY
CONFIDENTIAL AND THERE MAY BE
MORE COMPLEX. ISSUES THAT MAY
NEED TO BE RESOLVED OF COURSE
OPEN TO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS-
NUMBER EIGHT THE COMPLAINT
PARTICIPATION ARE COMPLAINING
PARTICIPATION IN. THE
INVESTIGATIONS. YOU KNOW BROADLY
SPEAKING CMA WOULD BE OPEN TO
DISCUSSING FURTHER WAYS TO HAVE
A COMPLAIN MORE ACTIVE IN THE
COMPLAINT PROCESS- THAT DOESN'T
UNDERMINE OR REDUCE THE DUE
PROCESS OF OUR LICENSEES WE
STARTED TO HAVE THAT
CONVERSATION WITH- SB NINE
TWENTY. CENTER TITLES BILL THIS
YEAR AND WHAT WAS JUST MENTIONED
REGARDING- STATEMENTS- THAT.
BEING ALLOWED IN THE COMPLAINT
PROCESS CERTAINLY OPEN TO HAVING
HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS- ITEM
NUMBER NINE- THE GREATER ACCESS
TO DISCIPLINARY CASES AND MORE
DATA. I THINK. STE GENERALLY
SPEAKING AN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC
DATA ONCE A DISCIPLINARY CASES
BEEN HAS REACHED RESOLUTION MATE
MAY BE HELPFUL FOR ITS FOR A DAY
AND INCREASE TRANSPARENCY- AND
MEETING CREASE THE PUBLIC'S
TRUST IN THE MEDICAL BOARD. WE
AGREE THAT GETTING A CLEAR
UNDERSTANDING OF WHEN AND WHY
THE BOARD DEVIATES FROM THIS
DISCIPLINARY GOT THE GUIDELINES
WOULD IMPROVE THE PROCESS FOR
THE BOARD. COMPLAINANT'S
LICENSEES AND THE PUBLIC AT
LARGE- COUPLE OTHER ITEMS- THE
EVIDENCE YOU STANDARD- I HAS
BEEN HAS BEEN DISCUSSED MANY
TIMES TODAY IT'S A COMPLEX
QUESTION- AND THERE MAY BE A
POTENTIAL WAY TO. THREAD THE
NEEDLE SO TO SPEAK BUT YOU KNOW
THE CLEAR. AND CONVINCING
STANDARD IS WELL STOP AS LONG
CAL- TO SUSPEND OR REVOKE
LICENSES AND IT. RELEVANT
PERSON. POSITIONS IN OUR
LICENSEES ARE. UNLIKE OTHER
LICENSEES THAT MAY BE ABLE TO.
FIRE LICENSE OR CERTIFICATE IN A
MUCH SHORTER TIME POSITIONS AS
YOU ALL KNOW- GO THROUGH ELEVEN
YEARS OF HIGHER EDUCATION AT
MINIMUM- SOMEONE TO HAVE A GREAT
ADDITIONAL TWO OR THREE YEARS
AND HAVE A EDUCATIONAL DEBT
BURDEN ON AVERAGE OF TWO HUNDRED
EIGHTY K. SO OBVIOUS FOR US.
REDUCING THAT EVIDENTIARY
STANDARD IS YOU KNOW VERY
CONCERNING- WHILE THE MEDICAL
BOARD CONTINUES TO STATE THAT
THIS CALIFORNIA'S AN OUT LIAR-
YOU KNOW THE CLEAR AND
CONVINCING STANDARD FOR ALL
pLICENSEES IS A STANDARD FOR
EVERY LICENSEE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. AND WE CAUTION THE
LEGISLATURE TO OF TAKING THE
POLICY APPROACH OF CHANGING THE
EVIDENTIARY STANDARDS FOR JUST
ONE BOARD- YOU KNOW THE AG'S
OFFICE MADE A POINT WHICH WE
AGREE WITH THAT THE PROCESSTO
GATHER EVIDENCE SHOULD BE THE
SAME WHETHER ITS PREPONDERANCE
OF EVIDENCE OR CLEAR AND
CONVINCING. THUS THE CHANGE IN
THAT STANDARD SHOULDN'T REDUCE
THE WORKLOAD OR TIMING IN OUR IN
OUR- OPINION I'M IN AND THEN
LASTLY ON THIS POINT I'LL JUST
NOTE THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A
DETERMINATION ABOUT LICENSE
REVOCATION RECENTLY- RELATED TO
PEACE OFFICERS- AND YOU KNOW
THEY MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE
CLEAR AND CONVINCING STANDARD IS
THE STANDARD FOR LICENSE
REVOCATION. AND DID- PIECE
OFFERS DO NOT DO NOT HAVE THE
SAME YOU KNOW WHAT EDUCATIONAL
REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS AS
PHYSICIANS SO I JUST WANTED TO
NOTE TO NOTE THAT- AND LASTLY-
STANDS STATUTE OF LIMITATION.
FOR SUBPOENA ENFORCEMENT. NO I
WE WOULD WITH- THE US CHAIR. WE
WOULD BE INTEREST IN HAVING
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT YOU KNOW
SEEING IF THERE'S AN AGREEABLE
PLACE AND TIME TO POTENTIALLY
CHANGE THAT BUT WE WOULDN'T WANT
TO UNDERMINE. OUR LICENSEES
PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL AND
PRIVACY RIGHTS- AND BEING ABLE
TO CHALLENGE YOU KNOW A
DISTRACTED WITH SUBPOENA OR THE
SCOPE OF A SUBPOENA- LASTLY SAID
MISTER CHAIR I WILL JUST SAY I
WANT TO. HIGHLIGHT YOUR COMMENT
ABOUT POTENTIALLY FUNDING IN THE
MEDICAL BOARD AND POTENTIALLY
OTHER DCA BOARDS WITH GENERAL
FUND DOLLARS IF THE LEGISLATURE
TRULY WANTS TO GIVE THE MEDICAL
BOARD THE ROOF RESOURCES AND
TOOLS TO COMPLETE THEIR WORK.
CAN PROVIDE CONSUMER PROTECTION
PROVIDING CONSISTENT GENERAL
FUND COULD BE THE ANSWER- IT'S
OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S
THE WAY THE STATE PREVIOUSLY-
PROVIDED SUPPORT TO- DCA BOARDS-
AND WE THINK WE CAN YOU KNOW
THAT MIGHT BE AN OPTION WE'D BE
INTERESTED IN HAVING THAT
CONVERSATION IN EARNEST- IN
CLOSING WE APPRECIATE THE
ABILITY TO ENGAGE ON THESE
IMPORTANT. ISSUES WE HOPE TO
CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE
LEGISLATURE AND MEDICAL BOARDS
AND ALL PUBLIC STAKEHOLDERS AS
WE MOVE INTO THE BOARD SUNSET
REVIEW PROCESS NEXT LEGISLATIVE
STATE SESSION. THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY THANK. YOU
FOR YOUR COMMENTS I HOPE YOU'LL
OF. ENGAGE WITH SOME US IN THE
COVER SAID WITH THE
ADMINISTRATION WITH REGARD TO
THE GENERAL FUND I'M NOT SURE.
HOW MANY OF. SURE OUR VIEW BUT I
THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS
TO BE- IT NEEDS TO BE PURSUED.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS
ON THE VARIOUS OTHER AGENDA
ITEMS I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING A
CONVERSATION WITH YOU AND YOUR
COLLEAGUES AT THE CALIFORNIA.
MEDICAL ASSOCIATION ABOUT THESE
AND HOW WE CAN WORK TOGETHER
WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD. AND
OTHER STAKEHOLDERS AND MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC TO COME TOGETHER.
WITH THE PRODUCT NEXT YEAR
DURING SUNSET REVIEW THAT MAKES
SENSE THAT PROTECTS. PROTECTS
THE PUBLIC THAT PROTECTS THE
RIGHTS OF PHYSICIANS WHO WERE
FIND THEMSELVES IN THE PROCESS
AND FRANKLY ACHIEVES. THE RIGHT
OUTCOME SO LOOK FORWARD TO IT
THANK YOU SIR I SHOULD AS MY
COLLEAGUE JR BERMAN IF HE HAS
ANY QUESTIONS OF CMA
REPRESENTATIVE NO. AND THE
ANSWER IS NO QUESTION SO THANK
YOU VERY MUCH SIR FOR YOUR
PARTICIPATION. I THINK AT THIS
POINT SINCE- I'M THE ONLY ONE UP
HERE BESIDES MY COLLEAGUE COULD
CHEER BERMAN FROM THE ASSEMBLY
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A FIVE
MINUTE RECESS AND RETURNED FOR
BOTH PUBLIC COMMENT. SO THOSE OF
YOU WHO ARE ON THE LINE PLEASE
DO NOT LEAVE. IF I CAN WE CAN DO
IT IN THREE MINUTES WE'LL DO IT
IN THREE MINUTES.
THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE A SHORT
BREAK THREE HOURS IS A LONG
TIME. SO LET'S MOVE TO
INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO PROVIDE
PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST LET'S MOVE.
TO WITNESSES HERE IN THIS ROOM
ANY WITNESSES WILLING TO
INTERESTED IN PROVIDING PUBLIC
COMMENT SIR PLEASE STEP UP TO
THE- MICROPHONE IDENTIFY
YOURSELF. AND PLEASE PROCEED TRY
TRY TO. I WOULD ASK ALL OF THE
PARTICIPANTS ON THE ON THE LINE
BOTH HERE IN THE ROOM IN THE
HEARING ROOM AND THOSE ON THE
PUBLIC LINE. TO TRY TO RESTRICT
COMMENTS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE
PROPOSALS THAT WE'VE AGENDA IS
TODAY THE PROPOSAL FROM THE
MEDICAL BOARD. ANY OTHER ISSUES
THAT WE PLACED ON THE AGENDA
RELATIVE TO THE MEDICAL BOARD
PROCESS. THAT WILL HELP US MOVE
THROUGH THIS EFFICIENTLY
EFFECTIVELY AND CERTAINLY AND
FORMER OR DECISION MAKING WHEN
WE MOVED TO SUNSET REVIEW- NEXT
YEAR SELF SERVE PLEASE PROCEED.
GOOD AFTERNOON THE SENATE THAT
OUGHT MY NAME IS TEACHER WALK
INS AND I'M A PUBLIC MEMBER AND
THE MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA.
AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO A PRISON CO
PUBLIC COMMENT. I'M TOLD THAT IT
WOULD BE. OPIATE TO THIS REMIND
US ALL THAT. YOU KNOW PUT UNDER
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
TWO THOUSAND ONE POINT ONE
PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC.
REMAINS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY OF
THE BOARD. AND SOME OF THE
ISSUES THAT HAS BEEN REYES. HIS
SUMMARIZE IT WHILE I WAS SITTING
HAS TO DO WITH THE PROCEDURAL
ELEMENT WHICH HAS BEEN OUTLINED
MAGNIFICENTLY BY KATHLEEN
NICHOLS. IN HER PRESENTATIONS HE
SKATES THE PIZZA ALL OF BOTH
WHAT THE IDEAL SITUATION WOULD
BE AND IN THE REALITY OF WHAT
HAS HAPPENED IN THE BOARD TO
MORE LESS AT THE GETTY. AND ON
THE OTHER END OF IT IS THE OTHER
SECTION WHICH IS THE DECISION
MAKING PROCESS AND THE DECISION
MAKING PROCESS. BUT IT TAKES
OVER FROM WINDOWS AT THE
EXECUTIVE OFFICER GETS THE
INFORMATION FROM THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL'S OFFICE AND THEN HANDED
OVER TO THE BOARD. IT IS VERY
EVIDENT THAT BOTH IN THE
PROCEDURAL. AND DECISION MAKING
PROCESS THE L. FAILURES AND DATA
CONS FULL THIS THE **** PROOF
ALL OF WHY. WE HAVE A RECORD AT
THE MEDICAL BOARD THAT OUT OF
TEN THOUSAND PLUS COMPLAINS WE
ONLY. GIVE DISCIPLINARY
PROBATION PERIODS ONE POINT 2%
OF THE TIME. ALSO WHAT IS MORE
TROUBLING ABOUT BEING IN THAT
SPACE IS THAT THESE VIEWS ZERO
OVERSIGHT ON US AS THE PUBLIC
AND OF THE BOARD MEMBERS IN OUR
DECISION MAKING PROCESS. AND
DATA PROCES IS PROTECTED UNDER
LEGAL FAIL. BUT THAT PROCEEDS IS
CURRENTLY FROM MY EXPERIENCE AND
I CAN ONLY SPEAK FROM MY
EXPERIENCE AS I DID THIS THE
PUBLIC PROTECTION ELEMENT ALL
THAT. AIMED AT ALL OF OUR
DECISIONS WE STIPULATE 80% MORE
THAN 90% ALTHOUGH ALTHOUGH CASES
AND OVER 80% OF A DOZEN FOLLOW
AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR YEAH. THE
POPE DOES DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES SPECIFICALLY THE
PROBATIONARY PERIOD PART OF THAT
WHICH IS THE MOST THE MOST.
DETERRENT ASPECT ALL OF THE
PROBATION OF A DO OF THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS THE REST OF
IT THIS KIND OF TREATED VERY. BY
THE WAY I NOTED THAT THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL- IN OUR IN OUR
OWN CASE WE BUT ALL THIS TIME
CANASERAGA STAMP RESPECTFULLY TO
ON BOARD BECAUSE WE KIND OF LEFT
WITH NO ON THE OPPORTUNITY BUT
TO AGREE WITH THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL WHEN THEY MAKE THIS
TRIP- PRESENTATIONS BY THOSE DAG
MAMMALS DOES DAG MEMOS THAT WE
ARE REPRESENT OFFROAD WITH
OMISSIONS COMMISSIONS. HIDING
FACTS AND I SAY THAT IN KNOWING
THE SERIOUSNESS OF WHAT I'M
SAYING I'M ON SOUND MIND AND THE
REASON WHY I'M SAYING THAT IT IS
TO CORRAL ALL OF THE BOARD
MEMBERS INTO A PLACE OF
POWERLESSNESS. THAT'S WHY WE
STEM 98% OF ALL THE
RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE DAY
IF THAT'S THE TO SEEK IS NOT
ALARMING TO ANYBODY THAT'S
LISTENING TO ME THEN YOU DON'T
SEE THAT THIS BOARD IS NOT IN
MAKING INDEPENDENT DECISIONS. AS
FOR THESE- THE LOS THREE I AGREE
WITH ALL THE PROPOSALS THAT MY
COLLEAGUES MADE AND I FULLY
SUPPORT HIM IN THAT THAT THESE
PROCEEDS OLD WE NEED THAT. THE
PROPOSES ON SIX AND EIGHT NINE
AND TEN. PLEASE ADD UP THE
NUMBER EIGHT THE PROPOSAL THAT
WE WOULD HAVE TO OFFER THE
PUBLIC AN EQUAL RIGHTS OR AT
LEAST SOME RIGHTS. EQUAL TO THE
DOCTORS RIGHT NOW THEY ARE ZERO
WE IGNORE THEM IN THE PROCES WE
DO NOT CONSIDER THEM I CAN'T SEE
YOU WHO WERE YOU CAN GO THROUGH-
COMMONS IN GETTING THAT WE'VE
HAD. THAT BOOK CLEARLY
ILLUSTRATE ACT ON MY SUGGESTIONS
ON THE NUMBER NINE SINCE WE AS
THE BOARD DO NOT HAVE OVERSIGHT
WE CAN MAKE WHAT EVER THE
SEASONS AND THE DYNAMIC THAT'LL
TAKE ON THAT ALL IN ALL VARIOUS
PANELS. DOES ALL THE DYNAMICS
THAT PRESENT THAT 98% ABA
STAMPING DECISION SO I WANT TO
SUGGEST THAT WE A WAY TO ADDRESS
THAT LIKE IN ACCOUNTING AND
EVERYTHING ELSE EVERY DAY YEAH
YOU DO A MINI ORDERED ALL OF THE
BOYS ONLY DURING FORCING THIS.
ISN'T THAT WE ARE THE BOARD
MEMBERS MAY. AND DIDN'T PRISON
THAT TO THE LIST HE DOES NOT
HAVE TO BE PUBLIC IT JUST HAS TO
GIVE GUIDANCE TO THE-
LEGISLATURE ASKED TO BETTER
REGULATE US AS A BOARD MEMBER I
WANT TO BE REGULATED. A LITTLE
BIT MORE IN DEPTH WE AVOID ALL
THE- PRIVACY ISSUES AND ALL THE
OTHER ISSUES THAT HAS BEEN
MENTIONED. ONE THE TEN DEAL. THE
ADDING THE WE AS PUBLIC MEMBERS
WE ALREADY IN THE- IN THE
DISCIPLINARY PROCESS WITH THE
DECISION MAKERS. BUT WITH THE WE
HAD MORE PUBLIC MEMBERS TO THAT
BOARD IF WE GIVE THE INTO THE
SAME DYNAMIC THAT THE BOARD AND
THESE PANELS COMMONLY OPERATE
WITH IN. WE WILL JUST HAVE THE
SAME RESULTS THAT WE'VE HAD FOR
THE LAST TWENTY FIVE YEARS I'M
THE ONLY BOARD MEMBER PUBLIC
MEMBER DENNIS IF THE SPOKEN UP
AND IS MANY MORE QUALIFIED
ATTORNEYS AND VARIOUS
PROFESSIONALS THAT HAS PRECEDED
ME THAT KNOWS THAT THIS THING
DIDN'T FEEL RIGHT AND AS FACTS
ON THE TABLE DIDN'T JUSTIFY THE
OUTCOMES OF ALL OF THE SEASONS.
SO IN IN IN AS A FINAL THOUGHT.
YOU KNOW IN THE QUESTIONS THE
SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM THAT WE
ARE FACING LIES WITH EVERYBODY'S
REALLY HONESTLY BECOMING HONEST
ABOUT THE PROBLEM. AND I FEEL
LIKE THE- AT THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL PRESENTING A CASE THAT
IS YOU HOPE IN. AND COULD NOT BE
IN THE IN IN CLOSE RELATION TO
WHAT THE REALITY IS PROBLEMATIC
TO ME. AND NOBODY AND WHILE I'M
NOT GONNA SAY NOBODY THE PUBLIC
KNOWS THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
IN THIS PROCESS. CAN SCREAM AND
SHOUT BUT BECAUSE THEY DON'T
HAVE A RIGHT. A LEGAL PRICE THEY
DON'T GET HURT I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY AND
WISH EVERYBODY A GREAT AFTERNOON
THANK YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS OR ANY
OTHER INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
TESTIFY HERE IN THE HEARING
ROOM. WHO WISH TO MAKE PUBLIC
COMMENT SITTING NONE MODERATOR
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE PROPPED IN
THE INDIVIDUALS WAITING TO
PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE
TELECONFERENCE LINE. WE WILL
BEGIN TO HEAR FROM THOSE
INDIVIDUALS. THANK YOU MR
SHERLEY JOHN THE PHONE LINES IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO- MAKE PUBLIC
COMMENTS TODAY PLEASE PRESS ONE
FOLLOWED BY ZERO. NINE EIGHTEEN
TI PRETTY WILL QUICKLY GIVE YOUR
LINE NUMBER OFFLINE PLACE YOU
BACK INTO THE QUEUE AGAIN FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT PLEASE PRESS. ONE
FOLLOWED BY ZERO AT THIS TIME
ONE FIFTY SEVEN YOU ARE OPEN.
HELLO YES MA'AM- SOME I HEARD IN
MY IN THE CALIFORNIA STATE
SENATE FOR THE MEDICAL BOARD
MEETING THEN THIS IS THE SENATE
BUSINESS PROFESSIONS AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
INFORMATIONAL HEARING REGARDING
THE MEDICAL BOARD THIS IS PUBLIC
. GOOD YES I JUST TOLD HER I
THINK ABOUT FIVE MINUTES WITH
THAT KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE GIVING
THE PUBLIC WELL. I'M ASKING THE
PUBLIC TO THE PUBLIC MEMBERS
WEATHER HERE IN THE HEARING ROOM
OR ON THE PUBLIC TELECONFERENCE
LINE. TO RESTRICT THEIR COMMENTS
TO THE- MEDICAL BOARD AND OTHER
REFORM. PROPOSALS THAT ARE IT
DOES SO IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS
REGARDING THOSE I'LL BE HAPPY TO
HEAR FROM YOU- I DO IN FACT I'D
LIKE TO START BY READING
DIRECTLY FROM THE MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA WEBSITE. THE
MISSION OF THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA IS TO PROTECT HEALTH
CARE CONSUMERS THROUGH THE
PROPER LICENSING AND REGULATION
OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS. AND
CERTAIN ALLIED HEALTH CARE
PROFESSIONALS THE VIGOROUS
OBJECTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF MEDICAL
PRACTICE ACT. AND TO PROMOTE
ACCESS TO QUALITY MEDICAL CARE
TO THE BOARD'S LICENSING AND
REGULATORY REGULATORY FUNCTION.
SO TO THE LAYPERSON WHO HAVE
BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD AND TO THE
LEGISLATURE FOR THE LAST FEW
YEARS. SAY THAT AT LEAST ON THE
SURFACE THERE DOES SEEM TO BE
EFFORT ON THE PART OF THE
LEGISLATURE CONSISTENT WITH THE-
MISSION FOR INSTANCE YESTERDAY
WITH AP THIRTY FIVE FIVE
ASSEMBLY MEMBER RARE. WHICH WAS
INTERESTING WE VOTED ON IN THE
SENATE YESTERDAY A BILL THAT
WOULD AMONG OTHER CHANGES- OF
THE TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY
THOUSAND DOLLAR LIMIT ON NON
ECONOMIC DAMAGES AND EXPAND THE
LAW TO INCLUDE AN ACTION FOR
INJURY AGAINST THE HEALTH CARE
INSTITUTION. AND WOULD INCREASE
ANNUALLY THE AMOUNT OF THE
LIMITATION AND EVENTUALLY ADJUST
IT ANNUALLY FOR INFLATION. I WAS
A CITIZEN OF THE LEAD PERSON I
ALSO FEEL COMPELLED TO SAY. I
FIND IT DISHEARTENING TO THE
VERY LEGISLATORS THEMSELVES WHO
MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE I'M
NOT EVEN INDEPENDENCE AT THIS
HEARING TODAY. FURTHERMORE
CERTAIN MEASURES AND BILLS
COMING OUT OF THE LEGISLATURE
HOW STARTING TO WONDER- WONDER
ABOUT THE SORT OF. THE INTEGRITY
OF YOU LAWMAKERS FOR INSTANCE AB
TWENTY NINETY EIGHT BY WE WOULD
REQUIRE THE MEDICAL BOARD TO
BRING DISCIPLINARY ACTION
AGAINST POSITIONS DO NOT FOLLOW
IN LOCKSTEP. WITH THE COVERT
AGENDA. WHITING AND STRONG
RUNNING UP CITIZENS BY THE
LEGISLATURE IT'S BECOMING
INCREASINGLY SHOCKING RIGHT DOWN
TO THE CENSORSHIP THAT TOOK
PLACE YESTERDAY IN THE SENATE
HEARING JUDICIARY TRYING BOB
WEINER'S BILL BE EIGHT SIX SIX.
SINCE TRYING TO ENGAGE IN
REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT OR
SHOULD WE FUND AND I WANT WHEN
THEY WERE TRYING TO CALL IN TO
EXPRESS. THEIR OPPOSITION TO A
BILL THAT WOULD AFFECT CHILDREN
AND PARENTAL RIGHT DIRECTLY
RELATED TO MATTERS- PERTAINING
TO THE MEDICAL BOARD. FRANKLY I
MEAN YOU'RE A FARMER AGENDA IS
BECOMING CLEARER MAN AND MAN
WILL BE WHAT THE MEDICAL BOARD
MA'AM DOING ONE. EAH VERY IN
OUR POOL TO SOMEONE OUT SCHOOLS
TO CODE MA'AM BEFORE I CUT. HAVE
GIVEN YOU I HAVE GIVEN YOU TWO
MINUTES TO PROVIDE A RAMBLING
COMMON. PLEASE ME. WE SHARE MATT
MATT MATT WILL JUST SAY ONE
THING TO THE LADY ON THE PHONE
MA'AM IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS TO
MAKE REGARDING THE- MEDICAL
BOARD REFORM PROPOSALS THAT ARE
IN THE AGENDA I WILL ALLOW YOU
TO CONTINUE. FOR ANOTHER THREE
MINUTES BUT WHAT I'VE LISTENED
TO IS A RUNNING COMMENTARY ON
THINGS THAT ARE COMPLETELY
UNRELATED TO THE AGENDA TODAY.
KING ABOUT MEDICAL BOARD ISSUES
PRO LEGISLATION I'M TALKING
ABOUT AB. TWENTY NINE. AND
ACCORD NEXT PLEASE THANK YOU
NEXT WE'LL GO TO LINE FIFTY
EIGHT YOUR OPEN. HELLO YES
PLEASE. HI I REALLY APPRECIATE
YOUR REVIEWING THE MEDICAL BOARD
IN THE- EVERYTHING YOU'RE DOING
BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE DONE- I
DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE
BILLION DOLLARS DUE TO MEDICAL
ERRORS. I COULDN'T SIT FOR THREE
YEARS HAD TWENTY INJECTIONS FOR
PAYING. AND THERE'S NOWHERE TO
TURN PRESS- THE YOU SAY IT'S NOT
OKAY FOR DR TO BE POLITE AFTER
ALL THIS WORK DONE. I KNOW MY
WORK FOR MY CAREER. AND I WALKED. HI RON WHO DIED TO DEATH
LEADING FOR TEN YEARS TEN HOURS
. AFTER BY. THANK DOCTOR STILL
HAS HIS CAREER. YES THE CAR WITH
HIM TO THE ER FOR BLOOD CULTURE
AND IT ARE YOU COULD GET A FOOT
CLOSER WHEN THEY GET AND SHE
DIED THAT DR SO HOW'S YOUR
CAREER. THAT OKAY YOU'RE ALL SET
THEN HER MOM IS STILL GRIEVING
AND I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON
BUT WHAT THEIR CAREER MORE
VALUABLE. THAN OUR CAREERS AND
OUR LIVES. ALSO YOU MINIMIZE THE
IMPACT OF FALSE MEDICAL RECORDS
AND MEDICAL RECORDKEEPING. MY
MEDICAL RECORDS DO NOT INDICATE
ANYTHING DOES HAPPEN TO ME. I
WENT OVER A HUNDRED DOCTORS AND
THREE YEARS FOR PELVIC PAIN HAD
TWELVE AT ONE FIFTY PUBLIC EXAM
BY TWENTY DIFFERENT DOCTORS. FOR
THREE YEARS AND NONE OF THAT IN
MY RECORDS NOW THE NUMBERS ARE
STARTLING RAINY. IT COST ME MY
EMPLOYMENT IT COST ME THIRTY. IT
COST ME. MORE COMMENTS EVERY
TIME I GO TO THE DOCTOR THEY
DON'T KNOW MY HISTORY OF TRAUMA
ARE YOU CAN GO MEDICAL BOARD
WITH FALSE RECORDS BECAUSE IT
LOOKS LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED TO
ME. AND I'LL BE ONE OF THE TEN
THOUSAND PEOPLE. THAT THE
MEDICAL BOARD YES- THERE'S NOT
ENOUGH EVIDENCE BY. AND SPEAKING
OF EVIDENCE HOW ARE YOU GOOD
EVIDENCE WHEN OUR RECORDS ARE
FALSIFIED WHEN WE ARE QUITE
INTERESTED IN CD'S FOR VIDEO OF
DOCTORS LEADING OTHER DOCTORS
ARE NOT DOCTORS. FOR THE
PROCEEDING IN TWENTY TWENTY TO.
THE COMPUTER I HERD DOES NOT
ALLOW THE- MEDICAL RECORDS
ENOUGH MEDICAL RECORDS YOU GO
THROUGH THE COMPUTER. NUMBER NOT
APPROACH AND ONE DOCTOR THE WIND
OF THE PLAN THAT WE'RE NOT
ALLOWED TO SHARE OUR PART. SO
HOW IS ANY OF THIS WORKING- ALSO
THERE'S LIKE 200-016-2000
SEVENTEEN WORK PLASTIC SURGERY
AND KILL SOMEBODY BECAUSE THAT
MIGHT PROFESSIONALS ARE THIRTY
HONOR THAT DOCTOR HAS NOT BEEN A
FROM THE BOARD YET. TWO THOUSAND
SIXTEEN HE HAD HEARD OVER TWENTY
PEOPLE. AND YOU FILE BANKRUPTCY
WHEN THEY TRIED TO SUE HIM.
TWENTY PEOPLE TRAUMATIZED SOME
DISABLED I'M COMPLIMENTING
SUICIDE FROM THE DOCTOR WHO SURE
THAT WHAT'S IT LIKE TO THE TWO
THOUSAND SIXTEEN. AND IF YOU
MAIN WHAT YOU'LL LIKE TO GO FOR
THE RESOLUTION IS THE ROOT CAUSE
OF MUCH OF IT. THEY HAVE GREAT
IMPACT ON PATIENT SAFETY. AND AT
THAT ADDRESS IN THEM AND THEIR
BEST TO GET HIM THEM. AT THE NET
. THE PARTIES WITH THEM. IT ALSO
LEFT THOUSANDS OF THE MOST
VULNERABLE PATIENTS THOSE WHO
EXPERIENCED MEDICAL ERRORS WHAT
NOTHING AND HARBORS TRAUMATIZED
HOMELESS COMMUNITY WEBSITE.
FORTY SIX YEARS DECIDED TO DO
SOMETHING. AND IT'S NOT A NOT.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY
ABOUT THAT I WOULD LIKE MY MONEY
BACK BUT MILLION DOLLARS I
BOUGHT FROM ALL THE MEDICAL
EVERY OTHER JOB HELP TO PAY FOR
THAT I LIKE THE DARKEST COMPANY
RIGHT SIX BILLION DOLLARS FROM
THAT. IDEA MICRO AND- FORTY FIVE
YEARS AGO NOW I HAVE THE FEELING
DOLLARS BECAUSE OF IT- ALL OF
THE TO PAY FOR THE WHOLE
REDUCTION. AND APOLOGIZE. I MAKE
IT BETTER FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. I
WOULD LIKE ANYMORE- AND THEN AS
A CHILD. JAMIR WHO WANTED TO ASK
BECAUSE THE DOCTORS DID TELL HIM
THAT HE NEVER DID THAT SURGERY
BEFORE AT THAT FACILITY. THE
ANESTHESIOLOGIST WAS NOT KILL IN
WHATEVER TRANSPLANT WHICH IS A
VERY SPECIAL TRANSFUSION OF
BLOOD CLOTTING FACTORS. THAT
NUMBER WILL NEVER BE THE SAME
THEY STILL SET THE TABLE EVERY
DAY FOR THE GIRL THAT DIED TWO
YEARS AGO THEY PUT THREE ICE
CUBES. AND HER CAR. WOULD YOU
LIKE. THEIR HEARTS ARE BREAKING
AND YOUR DOCTORS PROBABLY
NOTHING. SO I'M DONE BUT MORE
NEEDS TO BE DONE YOU MAY NEED TO
BE OUT OF THE LOBBYING AS AND
DOING THAT BECAUSE ARE HARMING
AND KILLING AND TRAUMATIZED ME
AND HOME WITH ME ACCORDING TO A
CITATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION-
MODERATOR NEXT PLEASE. THANK YOU
NEXT WE'RE GOING TO GO TO LINE
EIGHTEEN YOUR OPEN. HI CAN YOU
HEAR ME PERFECTLY. THANK YOU- MY
NAME IS LAUREN AND AFTERNOON- IF
I DO THIS RIGHT I HAVE THREE
PARAGRAPHS THAT WILL TAKE ABOUT
TWO MINUTES IT'S GOING TO TALK
ABOUT TAKES YOU TAKE. THEM THANK
YOU I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT-
UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT EXPERTS
IN A GENTLE NINE- BPC SUBSECTION
TWO TWO FIVE NINE POINT SEVEN
REGARDING MY PERFECTION QUOTE.
EDEKA BOARD OF CALIFORNIA SHOULD
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE MOST
CURRENT CLINICAL AND SCIENTIFIC
INFORMATION AVAILABLE A
VIOLATION OF THOSE EXTRACTION
AND POST OPERATIVE CARE
STANDARDS CONSTITUTES
UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT AND QUOTE
. HOWEVER THE MEDICAL BOARD
IGNORES THE MOST CURRENT
CLINICAL AND SCIENTIFIC
INFORMATION WHICH CONFIRMS
ADIPOSE TISSUE AND ORGAN ORGAN
THAT HELPS MAINTAIN HOMEOSTASIS
IN THE BODY. WHAT MOVING
FREEZING OR BURNING THESE CELLS
CAN CAUSE HEALTHY PEOPLE OR
ANYONE. BILLETE FIGURE MEANT TO
THESE PROPHECIES AND DEATH. WELL
KNOWN STUDY WELL DONE WELL KNOWN
STUDY AT UC DENVER ON HUMANS
CONFIRM THAT WAKE ME
DISTIBUTION ADDED INCREASE IN
DISEASE PRODUCING VISCERAL FAT
SHOWED UP IN A 1100% OF
PARTICIPANTS LONG TERM. THE
MEDICAL BOARD IS A DANGEROUS
AGENCY THAT LICENSES DOCTORS TO
DO PLASTIC SURGERY SCANS. I'M
ASKING YOU HOW THEY'VE BEEN
ASKING FOR TEN YEARS TO PROTECT
PUBLIC BY AMENDING TITLE SIXTEEN
FIFTY ARE SUBSECTION THIRTEEN
FIFTY SIX POINT SIX I HAVE
SHARED IN DEPTH MY PROPOSAL FOR
THIS WITH LEGISLATORS ON THE
MEDICAL BOARD. MEDICAL BOARD
EXPERTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE
OBJECTIVE REASONED AND IMPARTIAL
. MEDICAL BOARD EXPERT DR TERRY
TO GROW BEEN BANNED UNTIL TWENTY
TWENTY EIGHT BY THE MILITARY
HEALTH AGENCY FOR REPEATED ABUSE
. WHAT NONE OF THESE THINGS IN
MY CIVIL CASE OF DISABLING
BATTERY. BECAUSE OF THE WORLD
LIFE I LOST THE CASE AND WAS
DENIED NEEDED RESTITUTION RECALL
SO BURGER THE SURGEON IS ABLE TO
MAKE. THE JURY SAID THEY WENT
WITH YOU BRO BECAUSE OF THE
AUTHORITY CONFERRED UPON HIM BY
THE MEDICAL BOARD. THE BOARD
SHOULD TAKE YOUR BRA OFF THE
EXPERT LIST IMMEDIATELY AND TELL
THE PUBLIC WHY. EVERY CASE THAT
DEBORAH WAS INVOLVED WITH SHOULD
BE QUESTIONED. BY THE MEDICAL
BOARD EXPERT IN PLASTIC SURGEON
KENNETH USES CASES OF WRONGFUL
DEATH WAS ALSO CORRECT AND LYFT
PROFUSELY THAT WAS ACTUALLY FROM
THE MEDICAL BOARD WORDS- THE
PLASTIC SURGEON SHOULD NOT BE
EXPERTS FOR EACH OTHER I KNOW
I'VE SEEN PEOPLE ROLL THEIR EYES
WHEN I SAY THIS BUT THE REASON
IS. THERE ARE LICENSED AND THEIR
DOINGS CAMPUS EACH YEAR SO YOU
DON'T GO TO YOU DON'T SOLVE A
PROBLEM BY GOING TO THE SAME
GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT CREATED THE
PROBLEM WE'VE GOT PEOPLE DYING
AND BEING DISABLED THEIR
INSTAGRAM PAGES DEDICATED TO
WOMEN WHO ARE DYING ALL OVER THE
WORLD WHO ARE WATCHING JERRY
BROWN'S PROGRAMS PUT ON IN
CALIFORNIA. BECAUSE HE IS- EVEN
IF. IT BY BEING A MEDICAL BOARD
EXPERT. SURGICAL BATTERY SHOULD
BE PROSECUTED AS A CRIMINAL
OFFENSE. THIS IS RELATING TO
AGENDA ITEM NINE. MY CASE IS
REYES EATS UP LOQUITUR I'VE
PROGRESSIVE ACTION- I COULD
AGREE TO A SPOT WITH LIPOSUCTION
BECAUSE THE DOCTOR SAID HE
NEEDED TO DO IT FOR BALANCE AND
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FILLED
FLIGHT AND I WAS AS FIT AND
HEALTHY THE MUSCULAR EVERYTHING
HE REMOVED MY REMOTE PARTS OF MY
BODY THEY'RE GONE. AND ANYONE
CAN SEE IT AND I PROVIDED
EVIDENCE OF THE TO THE BOARD THE
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS ACT LIKE
SEVERE BODILY HARM AND DEATH OUR
STANDARD CARE THERE IS NO
MITIGATING REASONS THE STAFF
HEALTHY WOMEN UP DOZENS OF TIMES
INTO NO NO ZONE HERE AND- REMOVE
NEEDED BODY PARTS AND LEAVE. THE
CONSUMER IN A LIVING HELL. AND
ABOUT THE MEDICAL RECORDS THAT
THE LAST CALL MENTIONED USING
ONE SIDED MEDICAL RECORDS IS NO
DIFFERENT. THAN ASKING A RAPIST.
FOR HIS ACCOUNT. AND MUDDLING
HIS VICTIMS. MY RECORDS ARE
COMPLETELY FALSE AND DEFAMATORY
IN THE YEAR AND FROM THE SURGEON
AND IN THE YEAR FOLLOWING WITH
THOSE WHO WERE COMPLICIT. ARE
JUST COMPLETELY BONKERS AND WHEN
I FINALLY GOT SOMEONE TO EXAMINE
ME HE LOOKED AT ME AND SAID YOU
WERE BUTCHERED IN MADE AN
INVALID. AND GET A LAWYER AND I
WILL BE A DOCTOR AND SINCE THEN
MY RECORDS ARE CORRECT. BUT I
NEED TO CORRECT MY RECORDS AND
THERE'S NO WAY TO DO THAT. AND
IF I HAD BEEN ABLE TO
PARTICIPATE IN MY RECORDS IT
WOULD HAVE PREVENTED HARM. AND
CAN MAKE IT STANDARD FOR
CONSUMERS TO CONTRIBUTE TO AND
CORRECT THEIR RECORDS THIS WILL
PREVENT HARM AND OFFENCE JEFF
THIS. SO WHEN I LISTEN TO THE
BOARD MEMBERS TALK ABOUT. YOU
KNOW- THERE'S INTERNET YET
REGARDING THE AGENDA ITEM NINE-
AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S TALK OF-
THAT HAPPENED A LONG TIME AGO
WELL. I'M NOT GOING TO APOLOGIZE
THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR
ABOUT THE FACT THAT I'VE BEEN IN
THE HOUSE DOWN PRISON IN THE
PRESENT IN THE BODY FOR OVER TEN
YEARS. YOU THINK IT'S OLD HAT
IT'S NOT OKAY TO ME MY LIFE
ENDED. WITH THE ASSAULT. AND
MICHAEL LIFE WITH ASSAULT. AND
DOING THE BEST I CAN WITH
ADVOCACY AND WHATEVER I CAN DO
BUT I AM IN EXCRUCIATING PAIN
KERRY DOBRO CAME AND SAID NO
SHE'S NOT IN ANY PAIN AT ALL HE
LIED I CAN GET I CAN AND HAS.
PROVIDED DETAILS AND I WILL DO
IT AGAIN AND YOU NEED TO SEE THE
VIDEO OF MY MUTILATED NAKED BODY
I SENT BACK TO WHICH IS NOT FUN
FOR ME. WE NEED. ANYWAY I WANT
TO THANK THE OTHER ACTIVISTS AND
I WANT TO THANK MR WATKINS AND
I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK GERRY
WEBER. BECAUSE SHE'S BEEN JUST.
ASSEMBLY NICE TO ME LATELY AND-
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO THANK
PEOPLE- I HOPE YOU GUYS DO THE
RIGHT THING. ACTION CODE WHICH
NEEDS TO HAPPEN UNLESS YOU WANT
TO KEEP SANCTIONING DEATH IN ITS
MOUTH AND HARMONISE MOSTLY
HAPPENING TO WOMEN AND MOST
WOMEN DON'T WANT TO COME TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD THEY THEY- I DON'T
TALK THEM OUT OF IT BUT I KNOW
THAT IT'S THEIR DECISION BECAUSE
THEY- DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH
THE- THE PAIN AGAIN OF SOMEONE
DENYING GAS LIGHTING THEM AND
THEY KNOW ABOUT CASES LIKE MINE
AND OTHERS THAT ARE SO SEVERE.
YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW THE HALF OF
IT IF YOU DO LOOK AT YOUR
PLASTIC SURGERY CASES THAT COME
ONE AFTER ANOTHER THE THIRD
IMPACT CARP LUNCH THEY ARE DOING
. IT JUST NEEDS TO STOP I DO I
WANT. TO FADE ME. IT'S GOING TO
STOP WE HEARD YOU AND WE ARE OUT
. GOING TO MAKE THIS STOP WELL
WE KNOW THAT WE'VE HEARD YOU MAN
THANK YOU BACK ON. THANK YOU
THANK YOUNG GOING ON NOW AND I
SAID I WASN'T GOING TO RAMBLE
BUT YOU KNOW HOW IT IS WHEN
YOU'RE- WE APPRECIATE YOUR- WE
APPRECIATE YOUR PARTICIPATION
TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS. MARIN EXPLAINS. IT
WILL ALIGN SIXTY YOUR OPEN MIND
SIXTY PLEASE GO AHEAD. THIS
AMERICAN- STATION THANK THANK
YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LOOK
INTO THE PUBLIC AND I'LL TRY TO
SPEAK FAST AND ON POINT. YOU
REALLY NEED TO TAKE WHAT THE
MEDICAL BOARD IN THE CMA SAYS
WITH A GRAIN OF SALT BECAUSE
NEITHER IS A 100% TRUTHFUL WITH
YOU THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS
NEITHER WILL TELL YOU BUT WE
WILL. THEY'LL TELL YOU ABOUT A
DOCTOR HAS TO PROVE TO THEM BY
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
THAT THE REVOKED LICENSE SHOULD
BE REINSTATED BUT THE BOARD GAVE
BACK DOCTORS WHY FIX LICENSE
AFTER HE ADMITTED IN HIS
REINSTATEMENT HEARING THAT HE
HAD CONTINUED TO VIEW CHILD ****
EVEN WHILE HIS LICENSE WAS
REVOKED. THEY GAVE HIM HIS
LICENSE BACK AND HE LATER HAD TO
BE SURRENDERED AGAIN THEY ALSO
DON'T WANT TO EXPOSE THEIR
PRIVATE SESSION BECAUSE THEY
THINK THINGS THAT COULD GET THEM
INTO TROUBLE WE HAVE EVIDENCE
THAT ONE POSITION BOARD MEMBER
WANTED TO CLOSE THE CASE
BECAUSE- THEY QUOTE CAMPAIGN
EVERYBODY. CLOSE QUOTE THEY
DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW THEY
CONSIDER THINGS LIKE THAT THE
MEDICAL BOARD'S DISCIPLINARY
ORDERS AND GUIDELINES ARE ALMOST
NEVER USE OUT OF ORDERS THIRD
ONLY USED AS EXTREMELY LOOSE
GUIDELINES. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN
REVISED IN TWO THOUSAND AND
SIXTEEN AND THEY SHOULD. BE
MOSTLY ORDERS NOT GOT. TOO MUCH
A PART IS GO WITH THAT DOG.
IN ORDER TO STAY MONEY. A GREAT
DAY OF THIS IS A NINETEEN ONE
ABOUT RICE. AT CALIFORNIA WHO
WAS. WITH SEXUALLY ASSAULTING
LEAST SIX WOMEN IN HIS FOR TELL
PLAN. MEDICAL MORE DOCUMENTS.
QUOTE FOR PURPOSES OF THE
SETTLEMENT OF THE ACTION PENDING
AGAINST RESPONDENT AND TO AVOID
A LENGTHY ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARING. RESPOND AGREED TO
COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CLOSE
QUOTE. AND THEN THEY GAVE HIM A
PUBLIC. REPRIMAND WHICH EXPIRED
AFTER TEN YEARS AND HAS MEDICAL
BOARD PROFILE HAS BEEN
COMPLETELY CLEAR SINCE TWO
THOUSAND AND ONE. AND WE
RECENTLY HEARD FROM A LAWYER
REPRESENTING ONE MORE OF HIS
RECENT PATIENTS. THAT HE IS NOW
BEING SUED ON MORE SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT CHARGES. AND THIS IS
NOT THE FIRST DOCTOR WHO HAS
GONE ON TO RE OFFEND BECAUSE THE
MEDICAL BOARD FAILED TO PROTECT
THE PUBLIC. THE FIRST GO AROUND.
WE HAVE VAST AMOUNTS OF EVIDENCE
THAT THE GUIDELINES ARE NOT
GIVEN MUCH CREDENCE REGARDLESS
OF HOW LONG KERRY WENT MAKES A
PRESENTATION. THEY CAN THANK YOU
MAY FOLLOW THEM BUT YOU HAVE TO
ACTUALLY LOOK AT THEIR RECORD TO
SEE WHAT THEY'RE AFTER THAT
THEY'RE ACTUALLY NOT. EVER THE
BEST THING TO DO IN THE NAME OF
PATIENT SAFETY. PATIENT SAFETY
OF THE MANDATORY FIRST GOAL THEY
CAN ONLY CONSIDER REHABILITATION
THE FIFTH IN THE NAME OF PATIENT
THANK EACH AND YET
REHABILITATION IS OFTEN THE
FIRST GOAL. I HAVE TO WONDER HOW
OFTEN THOUGH LEGISLATURE TUESDAY
TO A MEDICAL BOARD MEETING TO
WITH HOW BOUT THEY OFTEN ARE.
MARIAN HOLLINGSWORTH AND I
ATTEND EVERY SINGLE MEETING AND
CALL THEM OUT EVERY TIME WE SEE
SOMETHING GOING WRONG. IF THE
LEGISLATURE ISN'T PAYING
ATTENTION CLOSE ATTENTION AND
AREN'T TAKING OUR REPORTS OF
WHAT WE WITNESSED SERIOUSLY. IS
IT ANY WONDER WHY THINGS ARE SO
BAD AND NOT CHANGING. WE WROTE A
REPORT TO SUNSET REVIEW THE GO
AND LEWIS SACRAMENTO ON OUR OWN
DIME. AND IT CLEARLY WENT UNREAD
BY THE LEGISLATURE IN THAT
REPORT WE TALK ABOUT MANY MANY.
VERY I DON'T YOU'RE NOT LOOKING
AT IT. AS THOUGH. YOU'RE HEARING
IT FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME. YEAH
BECAUSE WE'RE NOT THE MEDICAL
ASSISTING OR SOME OTHER KIND OF
PREPARE. DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE IN
THAT GET WHAT WE'RE DOING OR
DON'T KNOW WHAT THE- ABOUT AND
YET YOU KNOW ALL ALLOW AND-
LOBBYING. TO HAVE THEIR OWN.
THAT THE SHARE THE PATIENT THANK
AND TO THESE. DALY OUR- A TO BE.
AND ARE NEVER ALLOWED TO SERVE
ON THE MEDICAL. EVEN THOUGH WE
HAVE A- FOR A POSITION AND TO
THE HAVE BEEN VACANT FOR YOU.
ASKING ABOUT BOARD THEY CAN IN
LIKE. A CHILD HOW THEY CAN
IMPROVE. AFTER THEY SHOT
SINGLING A GUN. AND THEY KNEW
THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSED TOUCH IT.
THE BOARD REGULARLY. THERE THEY
DO NOTHING WRONG WHEN IT'S
POINTED OUT TO THEM. IF THEY
CAN'T EVEN ADMIT THEY'RE WRONG
HOW CAN THEY COME UP WITH THEIR
ONLY SOLUTION TO FIX THE
PROBLEM. WE HAVE A LOT MORE
EVIDENCE LIKE THIS. IF YOU
ELECTED TO PUT SOMETHING
TOGETHER FOR THE COMMITTEE THAT
WILL ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED AND
WE HAVE TO PATIENTS THANK YOU
LEE. GLADLY HOLD A LOT OF VICTIM
TEN. THROUGH THE COMPLAINTS
PROCESS BECAUSE OF THE MEDICAL
BOARD HAS MADE IT SO DAUNTING
AND CONFUSING. THANKS AGAIN FOR
YOUR TIME. WELL THANK YOU SIR I
WILL THIS WE- ON THE SAME
BUSINESS FOR. AND THAT. TO
COMMITTEE CERTAINLY HAVE NO
CONTROL OVER APPOINTMENTS TO THE
MEDICAL BOARD BUT IT'S PRETTY
CLEAR TO ME. THAT YOU'VE BEEN
ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS
PROCESS TODAY AND IF YOU HAVE
ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY. OR ANY OF
THE MEMBERS OF YOUR GROUP WE AND
WE ALL INVITE YOU AND AS THE
CHAIR I SPECIFICALLY INVITES YOU
TO SUBMIT THOSE MATTERS TO THE
ATTENTION. OF MY STAFF DIRECTOR
IN THE COMMITTEE AND TO MY
ATTENTION- AFTER THE HEARING
TODAY MODERATOR NEXT PLEASE.
THANK YOU WRITTEN HERE NEXT
WE'RE GOING TO GO TO MY NINETEEN
YOUR OPEN. HELLO CAN YOU HEAR ME
PERFECTLY PLEASE PROCEED YEAH.
THANK YOU JOINING OR AFTER YARD
GOOD AFTERNOON BY THIS TIME MY
NAME IS MARIAN HOLLINGSWORTH AND
I'M A PATIENT SAFETY ADVOCATES
IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY I ENCOURAGE
YOU TO ADOPT THE CONGESTION OF
THE BOARD BRAVE BUT THE
PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE
CHANGING THAT THE PROTECT MORE
PATIENTS INCREASE THE TIMELINE
FOR RESOLVING CASES I ALSO URGE
YOU TO PURSUE PLANS TO HAVE A
COMPLAINTS PROGRAMS THAT REALLY
LISTENS TO THE ACTUAL COMPLAINTS
NOT WONDER JUST PLACATE THEM
WITH EMPTY PROMISES. THE REASON
THAT'S IMPORTANT TO LISTEN TO
COMPLAINANTS IT'S BECAUSE WHAT
HAPPENED IN MY FATHER'S CASE
BECAUSE THE DRUG WAS IDENTIFIED
PUBLIC FRONT WITHOUT CONSENT
WHICH COST YOU STEP TOWARD
FAILED TO HEED MY WARNING THAT
IF THEY DIDN'T DISCIPLINE THIS
DOCTOR SOMEONE ELSE WOULD BE
HARMED NOTHING WAS DONE JUST TWO
WEEKS LATER THE SAME DOCTOR
OVERDOSED A PATIENT WITH FOUR
HUNDRED AND 85% AND WITH
INVESTIGATED TO THE DEATH
CERTIFICATE PROJECT HERE. FIGURE
HAS LISTENED TO ME IN THE FIRST
PLACE THE OTHER PATIENT MAY NOT
HAVE DIED IN ORDER FOR COMPLAIN
THAT PROGRAM TO BE SUCCESSFUL
COMPLAINANTS MUST HAVE A VOICE
AND BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY ALSO
BECAUSE COMPLAINANT PROGRAM
INCLUDE MORE MEETINGS WITH
ADVOCATES AND PATIENTS BOARD
PROMISED TO HAVE FOUR MEETINGS
LAST YEAR YET JUST ONE WAS HELD
IN WHICH. THE BOARD TOTALLY
CONTROLLED THE AGENDA. AT THE
BEGINNING OF THIS WILL BE IN.
PROCESS WITH THE- BOARD TO POINT
OUT LONG IT AFTER TAKES BECAUSE
AND THEN. STARK EFFECT. DID YOU
KNOW THAT THE BOARD'S OWN. SHOW
IN. TAKES IT OUT. OF THREE YEARS
. DURING THIS TIME. DANGEROUS
DOCTORS USUALLY REMAIN OF. LET
ME TELL THAT WOULD BE JUST CASE
SENDING. IN TWO THOUSAND
EIGHTEEN THE WOMAN. SURGERY
COATED AND YOUNGER RETIREES
CENTER THE DOCTOR DIDN'T CALL
NINE ONE ONE FOUR THREE HOURS IT
WAS A TREMENDOUS CREATURE
CREATIONS SIXTY. GET THE MEDICAL
BOARD TOOK THREE YEARS TO FILE
AN ACCUSATION THREE YEARS. AND
THIS JOB EVEN CLOSE THIS TIME
IT'S TAKING TO THE PARK ON THE
DISCIPLINE WHICH COULD BE
ANOTHER YEAR AND A HALF- BLASTED
SOME BRITISH DOCTOR WAS ALSO
CHARGED WITH MANSLAUGHTER IN
THIS CASE. AND DESPITE
DISCHARGED AND THE ACCUSATIONS
THIS DOCTOR IS STILL PRACTICING
I HEARING WILL BE HELD UNTIL THE
SUMMER. HOW IS THIS PROTECTING
PATIENTS. BOARD RARELY EVEN
FOLLOWS ITS OWN DISCIPLINARY
GUIDELINES EVEN IN DEATH CASES
TO WATCH THIS POINT THIS OUT
TESTIMONY AS A BOARD MEMBER. I
CAN'T EVEN NAME CHILDBIRTH CASES
THE DOCTOR. RECEIVED A BURKE.
REGARDED AS ITEM SO I INCOME YOU
NOT TO LOWER THE BAR DOCTORS
WANTING TO. OF PROBATE ARE
HAVING. REINSTATE THEY HAVE OR
USED DUPREY. THE OF THE PUBLIC
SHOULD REMAIN PARAMOUNT. AND
FINALLY IT'S ALARMING AND
DISHEARTENING THAT THERE ARE SO
FEW MEMBERS OF THE BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS COMMITTEE PRESENT
FOR THE HEARING JUST TO RE WORK
THERE. NOW OPEN YOUR LEGISLATOR
ARE NOT SECOND. ABOUT THE AND-
OF THEIR CAN. SENATOR BOB
CUMMINS IF WE ARE. AND PATIENTS
HAPPY LET YOU ARE HALF BUT THE
IT WE ARE NOW. WE WANT AND THE
MORE FOR. AND THE COUNT OF FROM
THE DOCTOR FOUND THE SUPPORT
FROM BETTER WITH. FROM OUR WITH.
AND URGE I ENCOURAGE YOU TO YOUR
CHANGES IN HOW THIS BOY SYSTEM
K. WITH THE MORTGAGE CONTENT.
DON'T END UP VICTOR OF NOT ONLY
TEAM STUFF. IN THE- MEDICAL
BOARD AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PRISON. I WILL NOTE
FOR ALL OF THE LIST- ON THE
PHONE. AND ON COMPUTER THAT THE
THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE BUSINESS
AND PROFESSIONS COMMITTEE OR NOT
SITTING HERE ON THE DIETS WITH
ME TODAY DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY
ARE NOT LISTENING. AND IT UP AND
LISTENING TO THE TESTIMONY
PROVIDED ON THE VARIOUS ISSUES
AGENDA IS FOR HEARING TODAY
BECAUSE THIS IS AN INFORMATIONAL
HEARING NOT ONE IN WHICH-
MEMBERS VOTE. MANY MEMBERS
PARTICIPATE OF FROM THEIR
DISTRICT OFFICES SINCE THAT'S
WHERE THEY ARE TODAY WORKING- TO
HEAR THE TESTIMONY AND TO HEAR
PUBLIC COMMENTS OF YOUR VOICES
FOR THOSE OF YOU ON THE ON THE
LINE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC YOUR
VOICES ARE BEING HEARD AND
THEY'RE CERTAINLY BEING HEARD.
BY MORE MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE THAN ME. SITTING HERE
ON THE DÍAS PRESIDING. MODERATOR
NEXT PLEASE. THANK YOU MISTER
CHAIR NEXT TO THE SIDELINES
FIFTEEN YOUR OPEN. MY IS DAVID.
BAKERSFIELD IN THE VOLUNTEER
WITH CONSUMER WATCHDOG IN THE CO
FOUNDER OF HOSPITAL WATCHDOG. I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU ALL FOR
THE SUCH OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
AND THE WILLINGNESS OF THE BOARD
TO. PRESENT THEIR OWN. THEY
THINK IT'S MAKING IMPROVEMENTS.
I AM AN ARGUMENT WAS INJURED BY
A PATIENT WHILE AT WORK. THE
CARD FINAL COURT COMPRESSION
DURING THIRD AND- SEVEN THIRTY
SIX SURGERIES THAT FOLLOWED.
THREE TO RELEASE THE FINAL
QUARTER COMPRESSION MEDICAL
ERROR CODE MIGHT WEDNESDAY
HEMORRHAGE AND ALL OF BY
LATERALLY. DON'T FORGET THE
BLOOD BEFORE THE THIRD AND THEN.
WHICH FURTHER DAMAGE. I THINK
THE HEMORRHAGE IT WAS TO BE
AUTOMATIC NECESSARY TO HAVE THAT
LOVENOX. ASSEMBLY LIKE.
EVENTUALLY LED TO A DOUBLE LUNG
TRANSPLANT. PREVIOUS LOST MY
MOTHER TO ERRORS. AND FILL YOUR
RESCUE FROM THE SHOCK. SO ON THE
TOPIC OF LOWERING THE BURDEN OF
PROOF TO PROPONENT OF THE
EVIDENCE IS IDOLS DEFINITELY
NECESSARY FOR ALL DISCIPLINARY
CASES. THE MEDICAL BOARD MADE
ONE BURDEN OF PROOF LOWERED. AND
COST MENTIONED TAKES TO MUCH
TIME TO FIND THE EVIDENCE THEY
NEED WHICH YOU KNOW IS A
CONSIDERATION I ASK YOU THOUGH
IF YOU THINK THE PRICE THAT THE
MEDICALLY INJURED PATIENTS ARE
PAYING. MUCH HIGHER THAN IT
COULD NOT BE SUBJECTIVELY
MEASURED AND MAKE THE COMING UP
HERE WAITING. I THE MOBILE UNIT
WITH READ AS IF IT NEVER GETS.
COMMENTED MARC REPORTING THIS
BAD COMMENT. IN THE PRACTICE.
CURRENT LAW JUST NOT SUFFICIENT
HI BIRTHING TO READ OFFENDERS.
YEAH IF THEY DO IN A OH FIVE WE
DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. I THINK THE
PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO KNOW WHEN
A HOSPITAL REVOKED POSITIONS
PRIVILEGES. PROVIDED BACKGROUND
IT CAN UNACCEPTABLE PRACTICES.
BECAUSE PATIENT SAFETY ISSUE AND
AFFECTS VIRTUALLY. SUFFICIENT IF
YOU. WERE ABOUT TO PRACTICE IN
ANOTHER HOSPITAL. BUT. UNDER BIG
BOARD NUMBER MAJORITY WILL
BENEFIT THE- AND IMPORTANCE
PROCESS. HAVING WORKED TO KEEP
HEALTHCARE I HAVE SEEN WHERE HOW
PROFESSIONALS INCLUDING MICE
THAT TIME CAN YOU LOSE SIGHT OF
THE HEALTH AND WE CAN BE US A
CALL INTO THE TRAP. OF DOING THE
WAY ALWAYS BEEN DONE. WHAT THE
BOARD THE PUBLIC. WE NEED A MORE
PERFECT. TWO BIRDS PERSPECTIVE
TO. AND MAKE IT BRINGS MORE
IMPROVEMENT. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
ALLOWING THE COMPANY SPEAK THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION TODAY
. MODERATOR NEXT PLEASE. IF
YOU'RE WILLING SIXTY TWO YOUR
OPEN. HELLO MY NAME IS MANY
TIMES I AM FROM BAKERSFIELD AND
A VOLUNTEER WITH CONSUMER
WATCHDOG MY GRANDSON FROM PUBLIC
HIGH. DIED FOLLOWING A POST
MORTEM C. SECTIONS HE SUFFERED
NEGLIGENCE OR THIS MOTHER AND HE
SUFFERED FROM A CASCADE OF
MEDICAL ERRORS INDEPENDENTLY. I
WAS DISCOURAGED FROM FILING A
COMPLAINT WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD
BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD THAT YOU
COULD NOT CHARGE THE SAME DOCTOR
TWICE. MY GRANDSON WAS A FIVE
POUND BABY BOY. HE HAS THE RIGHT
TO HIS OWN COMPLAINT.
COMMUNICATION WITH THE FAMILY
MEMBER IS CRUCIAL BECAUSE THERE
IS NO COMMUNICATION NOW WE NEED
REGULATIONS THAT THAT WILL
REQUIRE THE BOARD TO COMMUNICATE
WITH US. BEFORE QUALITY OF CARE
OR DEATH CASE IS DISMISSED OR
IGNORED. THE BOARD MUST BE
REQUIRED TO INTERVIEW THE FAMILY
MEMBER BEFORE DISMISSING THE
COMPLAINT. AFTER THE PROVIDERS
INTERVIEWED THE BOARD NEEDS TO
CONTACT THE FAMILY MEMBER TO
GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO PROVIDE
MORE INFORMATION. WHEN A DOCTOR
IS OFFERED A SETTLEMENT THE
BOARD NEEDS TO CONTACT THE
FAMILY MEMBER AND GIVE US AN
OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE A VICTIM
IMPACT STATEMENT. I'M CERTAIN
THAT THE STEPS WOULD NOT ONLY
MAKE YOUR ENFORCEMENT PROCESS
MORE EFFECTIVE BUT IT WOULD MAKE
THE PROCESS MORE FAIR FOR
FAMILIES AND PROVIDE SOME
ACCOUNTABILITY. STE LOWERING THE
ALL DISCIPLINARY CASES MORE OF
OUR CASES WOULD GO TO
INVESTIGATION IF THE BURDEN OF
PROOF WAS LOWERED. HOW CAN THERE
IS A PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
AND FORTY ONE OTHER STATES BUT
NOT CALIFORNIA. THE BOARD ITSELF
HAS SAID THAT IT WOULD SAVE THE
MONEY AND WOULD SHORTEN THE TIME
LINE WITH A LOWER BURDEN OF
PROOF. WE ALREADY HAVE A PUBLIC
BOARD MEMBER MAJORITY ON
LEGISLATION THE MEDICAL BOARD
SUPPORTS A PUBLIC BOARD MEMBER
MAJORITY AND SO DOES THE PUBLIC.
YES IT WOULD BENEFIT THEM BIRTH
MY PROCESS WE DON'T HAVE TO BE
ABOUT NOT HAVING ENOUGH MEDICAL
EXPERTS. WE HAVE A MEDICAL
CONSULTANT AND A MEDICAL EXPERT
REVIEWING THE CASES WE NEED A
MORE FAIR AND VERY PERSPECTIVE
ON THE VOTING OF THESE CASES AND
A PUBLIC BOARD. MEMBER MAJORITY
WOULD PROVIDE THAT. IN REGARDS
AGENDA. I FELT WOULD BE HOW MANY
FAMILY KNOW. WHAT EXACTLY GOING
ON EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. COST
IS ALWAYS MENTIONED. YES IT
WOULD PROBABLY COST THE MONEY
AND YES IT MIGHT BE AN EXTRA
STEP IN THE PROCESS. BUT HEARING
KATHLEEN MECKEL THE BREAK DOWN
HOW MANY DAYS IT TAKES FOR EACH
STEP. IS COSTS REALLY AN ISSUE
WHEN IT COMES TO KEEPING
FAMILIES WHO HAVE LOST LOVED
ONES. LIKE MINE IN THE LOOP OF
EACH OF THE PROCESS. SO THAT WE
ARE NOT FEELING LIKE NOTHING IS
BEING DONE. ON AGENDA NINE.
SENATOR REID MENTIONED WHY
SPECIFIC CASES ARE SETTLED R. Y.
DECENT CASES DEVIATE FROM
DISCIPLINARY GUIDELINES. I
BELIEVE IT WAS CRISTINA LOST AND
TO MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT
GIVING. LEGISLATIVE AND PUBLIC
GREATER ACCESS WOULD BE A BREACH
OF CONFIDENTIAL DELIBERATION.
THEN MENTIONED POSSIBLY HAVING
AGGREGATED REPORT FOR PARTICULAR
OUTCOMES. WINDOWS OUT CAN BE
AVAILABLE TO THE FAMILY THAT
SUBMITTED THE COMPLAINT AS WELL
OR JUST THE LEGISLATOR. THANK
YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
YOUR OF PARTICIPATION IN FOR
YOUR WILL UP WELL THOUGHT OUT
COMMENTS WE APPRECIATE THOSE.
MODERATOR NEXT PLEASE. BOB
REITER. THANK YOU MISTER CHAIR-
YOU ARE WE ARE GOING TO GO TO
LINE THIRTY TO YOUR OPEN THIRTY
TO PLEASE GO AHEAD. SENATE ROTH
THANK YOU- HI COMMENT AND
REQUEST ACTUALLY RELATES TO-
SOMETHING THIS MICHAEL SAID
ABOUT THE BACKLOG OF CASES AT
THE NBC- I MAY- I WAS REALLY A
SEMANTIC ISSUE COULD IMPACT THE
NBC WE NORMALLY NUMBER SERVICER
WE NORMALLY ASK YOU TO IDENTIFY
YOURSELF FIRST THAT WOULD. MY IS
RONALD TRYING AYE MAYES RETIRED
. ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON AND I WORK
AS ONE OF THE OUTSIDE
CONSULTANTS FOR THE NBC THANK
YOU SIR PLEASE CONSIDER CENTRAL
COMPLAIN UNIT. HOW TO REVIEW
CASES FOR THEIR- PRESCRIPTION
REVIEW PROGRAM. IN WHICH WE
REVIEW- PRESCRIBING INFO ON
MULTIPLE PHYSICIANS DISCERNMENT
MINISTERS SIGNED THE EVIDENCE OF
OPIOID OVER PRESCRIBING WE DO
THAT AND I ALSO HELP WITH SOME
PLASTIC SURGERY CASES DUE TO MY
SUBSPECIALTY BUT DISREGARDS- THE
PHYSICIAN AND IT'S REALLY A
SIMPLE THING HERE AT SEMANTICS.
DISREGARD THE PHYSICIAN
LICENSING CATEGORY OF VOLUNTARY
AND IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE
BACKLOG OF CASES OF. CASES THAT
THE- THE CENTRAL COME HE- NOW
HAS WHO STILL WITH. ON THE NBC
WILL IT STATES THAT THE OBVIOUS
DEFINITION OF VOLUNTARY WHEN YOU
RENEW YOUR LICENSE ENCOMPASSES
THOSE OF US WHO QUOTE PROVIDE
VOLUNTARY UNPAID MEDICAL
SERVICES SERVICES TO THE
COMMUNITY- IN OTHER WORDS YOU
KNOW TREATING PATIENTS WITHOUT
COMPENSATION. THAT DEFINITION
REMAINS ON THE WEBSITE BUT ON
THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION
IT'S BEEN CHANGE TO THE WORDING
USED IN CHAPTER FIVE ARTICLE
TWENTY SECTION. TWENTY FOUR
FORTY. WHICH STATES THAT THE
VOLUNTEER. CATEGORY VOLUNTARY
CATEGORY APPLIES TO THOSE WHOSE
LICENSE QUOTE IS FOR THE SOLE
PURPOSE. THE PURPOSE OF
PROVIDING VOLUNTARY UNPAID
SERVICE NOT MEDICAL SERVICE TO
THE COMMUNITY. AND WHILE IT CAN
BE ASSUMED THAT THE IMPLICATION
IS FOR MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL
SERVICE IT'S NOT STATUS OF
SPECIFIED. SO THE RESULT OF THAT
IS THAT FAT. MYSELF HE AND OTHER
PHYSICIANS WHO HAVE GONE TO
VOLUNTARY- SERVICE CATEGORY.
I'VE DONE THAT BECAUSE I DON'T
SEE PATIENTS IN A PRACTICE
ANYMORE INVOLUNTARY LOS ANGELES
SAFE HARBORS THAT PROVIDES FREE
MEDICAL CARE AND VALUATION TO
OUR INDIGENT POPULATION I
PROVIDE FREE EVALUATION TO
PATIENTS WHO CONTACT ME THROUGH
THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS
AND PROVIDED CANYON
PSYCHOLOGISTS ONE HELP- MONEY
REQUEST HELP ON VARIOUS
PROFESSIONAL WEBSITES.SO IT'S
OBVIOUS THAT THE IMPACT OF THE
VOLUNTARY LICENSE APPLIES TO ME
AND OTHERS WHO DO THIS. BUT
USING THE WORD SERVICE ONLY- IS
. SUBJECT TO BROAD
INTERPRETATION SO THAT IF I HELP
SOMEONE CHANGE A FLAT TIRE FOR
EXAMPLE ANY OFFER TO BUY ME
LUNCH AS A THANK YOU I'M NOT
ALLOWED TO ACCEPT IT. THE- WITH
THOSE WHO DO THESE REVIEWS- I'M
A STEP THAT I DON'T THINK WAS
MENTIONED WHAT HAPPENS IS THE
ANALYST WILL GET A COMPLAINT THE
FEDERAL COMPLAINT TO THAT STILL
DECIDED TO TEAMS TO HELP MERIT
SOMEONE INSIDE THERE WILL LOOK
AT IT FROM THE MEDICAL SIDE AND
THEN THEY SEND IT OUT TO THOSE
OF US WHO WERE OUTSIDE
CONSULTANTS. WE GET MEDICAL
RECORDS HOSPITAL RECORDS IMAGING
AND SO FORTH LOOK AT AND MAKE A-
AN OPINION REGARDING ALL OF THIS
TO OTHER TO STANDARD OF CARE WAS
MET AND IF NOT IS THE SIMPLE
DEPARTURE AT THE CORE DOESN'T
RECORD IS A GREGIS ENOUGH TO
REQUIRE FURTHER INVESTIGATION
SOMETHING REALLY SIGNIFICANT IN
WHICH CASE IT GOES TO ONE OF THE
IN HOUSE EXPERT MEDICAL.
REVIEWERS IN THAT CATEGORY. SO
BUT SINCE WE'RE GIVEN A NOMINAL
. PAIN BUT THIS FIVE DOLLARS AN
HOUR TO RENDER AN OPINION- I'VE
NOW BEEN TO LIKE GOAL AND THOSE
OF US- WHO ARE ALSO IN MY
CATEGORY THE VOLUNTARY WHICH I
WAS INFORMED BY THE- ANALYST
WHO- SENDS BE CASES- A NUMBER OF
US HAVE BEEN RELEASED. ON THE
NBC PAGE IT INDICATES THAT
THERE'S OPENINGS FOR MULTIPLE.
ONE VARIOUS SPECIALTIES- AND I
THINK THAT ACCOUNT FOR SOME OF
THE BACKLOG IN THESE CASES
BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GETTING
REVIEWS. CERTAINLY THERE'S OTHER
CONSTRAINTS. YOU KNOW SPEEDY
REVIEWS OF THESE THINGS BUT- NOT
HAVING ENOUGH CONSULTANTS TO
EVALUATE THE CASES IS ONE SO I
CAN'T DO THIS ANYMORE. SIMPLY
BECAUSE- THE MEDICAL BOARD EVEN
THOUGH THEY SAY THE CATEGORY.
CRANDALL'S COMPENSATION
PROVIDING MEDICAL SERVICES TO
THE COMMUNITY THAT'S A QUOTE.
NOW I'M THEIR APPLICATION HAS
DEFERRED TO- CHAPTER FIVE
ARTICLE TWENTY SECTION TWENTY
FOUR FORTY AND WHICH IS JUST
SAYS SERVICE. NOT MEDICAL
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AND FOR
THAT REASON. YOU KNOW OPINION
PROVIDING AN OPINION AROUND
CONSULTATION IS NOT CONSIDERED-
TOPSIDE THE VOLUNTARY CATEGORY
BECAUSE WE DO RECEIVE
COMPENSATION. AND I'D SAY AS
IT'S WRITTEN IN THE STATUTE.
THAT WOULD PRECLUDE ME FROM
READING A BOOK FROM FROM- YOU
KNOW OFFERING AN OPINION AS IN
THIS CASE. OR PROVIDING SERVICES
TO THE- MOVIE INDUSTRY WHICH
I'VE DONE. BORDER PATROLS OF SAY
THIS IT'S A LITTLE BEYOND THE
SCOPE OF THIS HEARING BUT- I
NOTICE THAT THE MEDICAL BOARD-
PARTICIPANTS ARE STILL ON THE-
ON THE VIDEO SO- I GUESS YOU'RE
TALKING TO THE RIGHT TO GROUP
WHEN YOU'VE PROVIDED YOUR
COMMENTS AND I CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE. MAUFACTURING PUTTING
THEIR HEAD NO PROBLEM SIR THANK
YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO- TO THE
STATE. I'D LIKE TO CONTINUE. I'M
SURE THEY'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT
FOR YOU YOU HAVE A GOOD DAY SIR.
BYE BYE MODERATOR NEXT PLEASE.
NECKLINE NUMBER TWENTY FOUR YOUR
LINE IS OPEN. THREE THANK YOU
HELLO EVERYBODY MY NAME IS OPEN
AIRY NINE FROM SAN FRANCISCO I'D
LIKE TO COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS
FOUR EIGHT NINE AND TEN.
EIGHTEEN PROTECTION OVERSIGHT OR
CENTRAL TENETS OF AN ARTICLE
BOARD YES WE HAVE INCREASINGLY
INTEGRATION INTEREST RATE I HAD
A PATIENT SAFETY. AB STRONG
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAWS THAT
HAVE LED TO INNOVATION PUBLIC
TRUST AND BASIC CIVIL. RIGHTS
FOR PATIENTS. AND OLDER HELPED
MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE SHE WAS VERY
BY. BEFORE EIGHT VERY WELL
RESPECTED. MASS ERRORS ENDED HER
LIFE. TURNED THE MEDICAL BOARD
WHEN CALIFORNIA LAW PREVENTED US
FROM SPEAKING DR. BUT THAT DOOR
QUICKLY KAYO AFTER A FEW WEEKS
COMPLETELY IT WITHOUT ACTION
THERE WERE NO INTERVIEW. OR
ANYTHING. EVIDENCE OUR OF
MEDICAL WITH. THREE PART HEALTH
REFER PARKING AT THE HOT AND
SIMPLY. OH BOY BUT THAT HARD. I
KNOW BELIEVE MANY MEMBER AND
STAFF HAVE A FOR UNDER OF ACTUAL
PROCESS MY EXPERIENCE NOT ALL
COMPLY ARE THOROUGHLY
INVESTIGATED ONE BOARD MEMBER
FALSELY STATED A SUNSET HEARING
ALL COMPLAINANTS ARE INTERVIEWED
BUT THAT WASN'T MY EXPERIENCE OR
THOSE THOUSAND OTHER COMPLAINTS
. LAST YEAR'S MEDICAL BOARD
SHARED NEW VIDEO ON THE
COMPLAINT PROCESS WITH THE
PUBLIC AND THE MISINFORMATION
WAS ASTOUNDING. IT WAS WRONG
ABOUT COMPLAINT INTAKE
DOCUMENTATION IN THE MEDICAL
CONSULTANTS ROLE. DISCONNECT IT
ALARMING THAT HELP EXPLAIN BY
THE MEDICAL BOARD HAS BECOME SO
INEFFECTIVE IN THE PUBLIC SIDE.
WHAT CAN BE DONE WELL A PUBLIC
BOARD MEMBER MAJORITY HELPED
RESTORE PUBLIC TRAFFIC. ADDING
EDUCATION APPLICANTS THE BOARD
WHICH INCLUDES AN IMPORTANT
STAKEHOLDER THAT HAD YET TO BE
GIVEN ANY FORMAL BOYS. THE FACT
CALIFORNIA IN PLACE FOR
CONDITION DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS
THAT ARE FAR MORE FAVORABLE.
POSITION. THAN THOSE OTHER STATE
. WHAT PATIENTS AND FAMILIES
HAVE BEEN PAYING FOR SO LONG.
THE MEDICAL COULD PHYSICIAN AND
TRACK AHEAD OF THE PUBLIC. I
WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND REQUIRE ONE
PATIENT AND PHYSICIAN INTERVIEWS
TO COMPLAIN THAT NOTIFICATION
BEFORE ANY SETTLEMENT. THREE
VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
INCLUSION OF OTHER EVIDENCE
OUTSIDE OF THE MEDICAL RECORD
AND FIVE THE PEOPLE PROCESS.
OUTSIDE A DIRECT COMPLAINT THE
MEDICAL BOARD OUGHT TO
RECONSIDER HOW IT HANDLED PUBLIC
REPORTING OF MALPRACTICE
SETTLEMENTS. FOR EXAMPLE THE
ANESTHESIOLOGISTRESPONSIBLE FOR
MY SISTER'S DEATH STILL SHOWS
ZERO BATTLEMENTS ON THE MEDICAL
BOARD'S WEBSITE DESPITE HAVING
AT LEAST ONE. AND HI MY FRIEND
OR CALL SURGERY CANCER.
INTERESTING ME HOW 1100% OF THEM
DON'T WANT THE ANESTHESIOLOGIST
TREATING THEM. WELL I UNDERSTAND
THAT IT'S UNFAIR TO PENALIZE THE
PHYSICIAN AFTER ONE MISTAKE. MY
SISTER LOST HER LIFE. BUT THAT
FAIR TO HER DID SHE REPEAT DUE
PROCESS. UNFORTUNATELY CLIMATE
HERE IN CALIFORNIA WHERE
PHYSICIAN MISTAKES GO UNCHECKED
WITHOUT ANY REAL CONSEQUENCES.
THE BREAKDOWN OF MENTALITY BACK
IN OUR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM AND
THAT MEANS PUTTING PATIENTS
FIRST. THANK YOU FOR THANK YOU
FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION- TODAY
BUT RETURN NEXT PLEASE. AN EXTRA
LINE THIRTY PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON BERMAN ROCKING
COMMITTEE MEMBERS MY NAME IS
JENNY JOHNSON AND I LIVE IN
TRACY. I'M A VOLUNTEER WITH
CONSUMER WATCHDOG. I LOST MY SON
RICHARD MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE IT
FIVE THREE SEVERAL MEDICAL
ERRORS FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS TO
BE IS INOPERABLE BRAIN CANCER.
YOU CANNOT IMAGINE HOW EXCITED
WE WERE WHEN THEY DECLARED HIM A
SURVIVOR. SHORTLY AFTERWARDS HE
TRAGICALLY DIED FROM THE
SENSELESS WITHHOLDING OF
TREATMENT OTHER TREATABLE
INFECTION AT THE AGE OF TWENTY
FIVE YEARS OLD. WE WANTED
ACCOUNTABILITY SOMEONE HAD TO BE
TOLD. KNOWING HE COULD NOT HAVE
AFFORDED LEGAL PROTECTION WE
WERE DIRECTED TO REPORT TO THE
CALIFORNIA MEDICAL BOARD.
SEVERAL REPORTS WERE FILED AND
WE WAITED FOR QUITE SOME TIME
ONLY TO READ THE BOARD OF
INVESTIGATORS WHO WERE IT WAS
DISMISSIVE OF MICE AND DEATH. IN
OUR CASE WAS ULTIMATELY
DISMISSED. REALIZATION AND NO
ONE WOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE
WAS CLEAR AND GUT WRENCHINGLY
PAINFUL. MY LIFE DIDN'T MATTER
TO THEM. ADDRESSING AGENDA
NUMBER FOUR I THINK THAT THE
MEDICAL BOARD WOULD WANT THE
PUBLIC TO SEE THEM AS A FAIR AND
PROTECTIVE OF NOT ONLY THE
PHYSICIANS BUT ALSO THE PUBLIC
OF WHICH IT SERVES IN ORDER TO
PUT IMPROVE CONSUMER PERFECT
PROTECTION. WE NEED TO HAVE-
LOWER THE BURDEN OF PROOF SHOULD
BE LOWERED FROM CLEAR AND
CONVINCING EVIDENCE. CHU
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE FOR
ALL DISCIPLINARY CASES. BURDEN
OF PROOF IS CURRENTLY TOO HIGH
FOR MOST CASES CONTRIBUTING TO
THE MANY CASES BEING DISMISSED.
ADDRESSING AGENDA NUMBER EIGHT
IT IS MY BELIEF THAT THE MEDICAL
PROFESSION AND THOSE WHO
GOVERNMENT STRIVE TO BECOME
BETTER AT PROVIDING THE HIGHEST
QUALITY OF CARE FOR ALL OF THEIR
PATIENTS STONE AN EFFORT TO
ACHIEVE THIS I BELIEVE. THAT
BEFORE QUALITY OF CARE AND DEATH
CAN PLAINTIFF JUST MEANT. FORD
SHOULD INTERVIEW THE COMPLAINANT
FAMILY MEMBER. AFTER THAT AFTER
THE FISHES PHYSICIANS THE
INTERVIEW THE COMPLAINT FOR
FAMILY MEMBERS SHOULD BE
CONTACTED FOR INPUT. AND THIRD
THAT THE COMPLAINT FOR FAMILY
MEMBERS SHOULD BE NOTIFIED
BEFORE IT SETTLEMENT IF OFFERED
AND THE COMPLAINT SHOULD BE
GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE
IT BECOMING CAN IMPACT
STATEMENT. IN ADDRESSING GENDER
NUMBER NINE BECAUSE OF THIS
EXPERIENCE OF NO ACCOUNTABILITY
AND NO INFORMATION INFORMATION
GIVEN AS TO WHY MY CASES WERE
DISMISSED I FIRMLY BELIEVE THE
LEGISLATURE AND PUBLIC HE
GREATER ACCESS TO MEDICAL BOARD
OF CALIFORNIA'S DISCIPLINARY
CASE RESULTS. INCLUDING THE
NATURE OF THE INITIAL COMPLAINT
LEADING TO INVESTIGATIONS FACTS
OF THE CASE DISCIPLINE IMPOSED
AND THE RATIONALE FOR THIS
SPECIFIC DISCIPLINE OR LACK OF
DISCIPLINE. IN ADDRESSING THE
LATTER JANET ITEM OF NUMBER TEN.
IT IS ALSO MY BELIEVE
REPUBLICANS FOR THE MEDICAL
BOARD WOULD BRING COMPASSION TO
THOSE ALREADY SUFFERING FROM
LONG TRANSPARENCY TO THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE PUBLIC AS
WELL AS RESTORING TRUST
RELIABILITY AND STRENGTH BACK
INTO THIS IMPORTANT ENTITY. I'D
LIKE TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU VERY FOR THE COME-
NEXT PLEASE. AND NEXT TO A LINE
OF FIFTY NINE PLEASE GO AHEAD.
GOOD AFTERNOON TERRORIZING
COMMITTEE MEMBERS MY NAME IS
COUNTY NICK I'M A PATIENT SAFETY
ADVOCATE BOARD MEMBER WITH
CONSUMER WATCHDOG AND MOST
IMPORTANTLY I AM THE MOTHER OF
ALEX MACK MY SON WHO AT THE AGE
OF TWENTY DIED DUE TO MEDICAL
NEGLIGENCE. AN ORANGE COUNTY
HOSPITAL ALEX WAS GIVEN A LETHAL
COMBINATION OF ELEVEN DIFFERENT
MEDICATIONS BUT BECAUSE THE
DOCTOR VOTER IN ORDER SHALL WE
CHECK HIS VITALS WHILE AWAKE.
ALEX WAS LEFT ON MONITORED FOR
MORE THAN SEVEN HOURS WE WOULD
FINALLY CHECKED ON DURING
MORNING ROUNDS. ALEX WAS FOUND
DEAD. HE WAS ALREADY IN THE
MARKET. THE CORNER DETERMINED
THAT ALEX DIE DUE TO ACUTE POLLY
DRUG INTOXICATION IN OTHER WORDS
ALEX HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO DEATH
IN THE HOSPITAL. TO ARMS WITH
THE FARMERS REPORT MEDICAL
RECORDS WHICH SHOWED OBVIOUS
NEGLIGENCE IT'S C. PH REPORTAGE
OF MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS AND
DECLARATIONS FROM MULTIPLE
MEDICAL EXPERTS SHOWING THE
DOCTOR'S NEGLIGENCE. HAD CAUSED
ALEX'S DEATH. I FILED A
COMPLAINT WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD
. I WOULD CERTAINLY NOT REGULAR
AGE WHICH SWIFT ACTION AND HOLD
THE DOCTOR TO ACCOUNT FOR
KILLING MY SON BUT I WAS SO
WRONG. IT TOOK TWO YEARS FOR THE
BOARD TO EVEN INTERVIEW THE
DOCTOR MEANWHILE HE CONTINUE TO
PRACTICE AND I CAN ONLY IMAGINE
WHAT THE DOCTOR SAID TO THE
INVESTIGATORS SINCERE BLIGHTING
ALEX'S METAL MEDICAL RECORDS.
AND HAD BEEN HEARD LYING ON TV
REGARDING ALEX'S DEATH. AFTER
THREE YEARS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
DID FILE AN ACCUSATION AGAINST
THE DOCTORS CITING REPEATED
NEGLIGENT ACTS. A PETITION TO
REVOKE THE DOCTOR'S LICENSE.
ANOTHER YEAR PASSES SECRET
BACKROOM DEAL WAS STRUCK AND THE
DOCTOR GOT OFF WITH A PUBLIC
REPRIMAND. MORE THAN A SLAP ON
THE WRIST FOR KILLING MY SON. I
WILL BE NOTIFIED VIA EMAIL OF
THE BOARD'S DECISION. BROKE OUT
FOR YOU PROCESS I WAS LEFT
COMPLETELY IN THE DARK EVEN
THOUGH I REPEATEDLY CALLED AND
EMAILED THE BOARD I NEVER FELT
AS IF THEY WERE WORKING IN THE
BEST INTEREST OF PATIENT SAFETY
. STILL GOING FORWARD WHAT
CHANGES TO IT IS NECESSARY AND
HOW COULD MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE
BOARD. RUCHED AGUADA AGENDA ITE
NUMBER EIGHT. I WOULD HAVE
APPRECIATED THE OPPORTUNITY TO
BE INCLUDED AS A PARTICIPANT IN
THE COMPLAINT PROCESS THAT YOU
HAVE HAD AN ADVOCATE A LIAISON
TO COMMUNICATE WITH. I SHOULD
HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED BEFORE THE
SETTLEMENT WAS OFFERED AND YOU
HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SHARE WITH THE
DECISION MAKERS HELP ALEX'S
DEATH. BECAUSE OF THAT DOCTOR'S
NEGLIGENCE DEVASTATED MY FAMILY.
AN AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TEN. THE
BOARD HAS LOST THE TRUST OF THE
PUBLIC. PUBLIC MEMBER MAJORITY
WILL HELP RESTORE THAT TRUST WE
NEED TO HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT THE
BOARD WHOSE JOB IT IS TO PROTECT
US AND TO HELP THEM HELP CARE.
PATIENT WILL DO THEIR JOB.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE PERCEPTION
IS THAT THE BOARD GOES OUT OF
ITS WAY TO PROTECT DANGEROUS
DOCTORS. I WANT TO THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO
COMMENT AND I REMAIN COMMITTED
TO KEEP SHARING ALEX'S STORY. TO
WORK WITH ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN
HOPES OF ENACTING MEANINGFUL
REFORM THANK YOU THANK YOU
MEMBERS SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS BUT
WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOUR
PARTICIPATION TODAY. STRANRAER
NEXT PLEASE THANK YOU MISTER
WILL LINE THIRTY FIVE YOUR OPEN
THIRTY FIVE. ON MY NAME IS
EVELYN MARTINEZ I'M FROM AND
WHAT AND I AM. A VOLUNTEER WITH
CONSUMER WATCHDOG I LOST MY FIVE
YEAR OLD SON DUE TO SCHEDULING
AND TOXICITY. MY FRIEND BECAME
CONTACT THE KID WITH THE DAILY
USE FOR THE MRI HE COULDN'T
WALK. I DID NOT BECOME SEVERAL
OTHER MRI. LICENSE PROVIDERS-
BACON PROVIDERS THEY CALLED THE
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND
FAMILY SERVICES WHO TOOK AWAY MY
PARENTAL RIGHT HANDING ME THAT
MY SON WOULD. HAVE THE MRI WITH
OR WITHOUT MY CONSENT. MY WANTED
TO THE MRO ONCE THE- AS A WAITER
FROM CHILD TO OUT THE MRI
MACHINE. I FINALLY RECEIVED A
PHONE CALL FROM THE
ANESTHESIOLOGIST STATING THAT MY
SON WAS OUT. AND THE PMR WAS A
SUCCESS. OUR CORPORATE OF MY
CHILD AS I WALKED INTO THE
PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE UNIT TO
FIND HIS LEG. THERE INVERSE
ANTIQUE BURNED. THIRTY JAMES
ACTED AS IF NOTHING WILL HAPPEN.
MY SENTENCE GET TRANSFERRED TO A
BURN CENTER AND HE SAID NOT TO
TREAT FOR THE BIRDS. AND THEN
THE GIVEN ORPHALI. THAT DID NOT
APPROVE IN. MADE MORE. ON IT
BASED STANDARD MUST CHANGE TO
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE FOR
ALL CASES JUST SOME WE NEED FOR
CROSS WERE MORE OF WORK WILL BE
REVIEWED FORTY ONE OTHER STATES
THIS LAW BURDEN OF HOW MANY
CASES ARE DISMISSED HELLO BURDEN
OF PROOF FALLS PROVIDE MORE AND
WE BE THE POOR MONEY AND WANTED
THEIR ENFORCEMENT THANK FAMILIES
NEED INPUT INTO THE ENFORCEMENT
PROCESS WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO
JUST TURN IN OUR COMPLAINT AND
HAVE NO INPUT REQUIRING US TO
WAIT WAIT FOR LATER IF WE EVEN
RECEIVED ONE SO MANY COMPLAINTS
ARE DISMISSED BEFORE QUALITY OF
CARE OR DEATH CASES DISMISSED
THE FAMILY MUST BE INTERVIEWED.
THE FAMILY SHOULD BE CONTACTED
AFTER THE POSITION INTERNAL THE
FAMILY SHOULD BE NOTIFIED BEFORE
SETTLEMENT IF OFFERED AN
OPPORTUNITY. TO GIVE A VICTIM
IMPACT. LATER IN FOR PART MORE
FOR THE- AND THE UP. TO PROVIDE
. INFORMATION IF WE- REPORTS OF
THE PUBLIC BOARD MEMBER MUCH.
AND THE PUBLIC FORTY BOARD
MEMBER BUDGET WE HAVE HAD A-
THAT MAJORITY FOR YOU FOR TO
LONG AND IT'S NOT WHERE. PUBLIC
MEMBERS EVEN ADMITTED THAT THE
HAVE NOT AGREED WITH DR THAT
TIME. BUT THEY HAVE NOT HAD THE
BILL WITH. THE. NEEDED THANK YOU
. THANK YOU MA'AM NEXT PLEASE.
THANK YOU LIKE FIFTY THREE YOUR
OFFICE. HELLO HELLO NEAR ME
PERFECTLY VICE AT. THE MORNING
CARE ACT ARRIVE MY NAME IS A
TRICKY DOMINGUEZ AND I AM FROM
BAKERSFIELD AND A VOLUNTEER WITH
CONSUMER WATCHDOG. AND THIS IS
MY EXPERIENCE. MY DAUGHTER DEMI
WAS DENIED CARE. BY TWO
DIFFERENT PROVIDERS WHEN SHE
WENT TO THE HOSPITAL FOR HOW THE
DOCTOR THERE DID NOT OFFER HER.
STATEMENT I NEVER GAVE HER A
DIAGNOSIS. WHAT WE DID NOT HAVE
. BUT THE RIGHT TO KNOW THAT HE
WAS A REPEAT OFFENDER. WHO HAD
BEEN HARMING MOTHERS AND BABIES
FOR OVER TWENTY FIVE YEARS. HE
SAID MY DAUGHTER HOME. DIE HE
DIED OF A SEIZURE BEATING HER
UNBORN CENTER STATE MEDICAL
NEGLIGENCE. I DON'T. LOWERING
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS NECESSARY
FOR ALL DISCIPLINARY CASES. THE
MEDICAL BOARD THE CORK FLOORING
THE BURDEN OF PROOF. MORE
DOCTORS LIKE MYDAUGHTERS WOULD
NOT. BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO
PRACTICE FOR TWENTY FIVE YEARS
AND ALLOW TO HARM THE COUNTLESS
FAMILIES. LOWERING THE BURDEN OF
PROOF IT WOULD PROVIDE
ACCOUNTABILITY WITH THE PUBLIC
AND IT WOULD MAKE. THE PROCESS
MORE EFFECTIVE FOR THE BOARD AND
LESS COSTLY. SHE WOULD.
COMPLAINT COULD A SIMPLE NETWORK
NONPROFIT THAT. WE NEED
MANDATORY INTERVIEW BEFORE THE
QUALITY. A CARE YEAH COMPLAINT
IS DISMISSED WE NEED TO FOR TO
CONTACT THE COMPLACENT AFTER.
INTERVIEW IT WOULD HAVE MADE A
DIFFERENCE IN MY CASE. THE
DOCTOR LIGHT THE FORECAST. AND
THE FORECAST SEATED BASED ON HIS
LIFE. AT I'D BEEN CONTACTED I
WOULD HAVE PROVIDED THE BOARD
WITH FIFTY HE H. EIGHT ONE
ACTIVATION FEE. SPRUCE THAT THE
DOCTOR HAD LIGHT THE BOARD. IT
WOULD NOT MIND WORK AGAIN YES
BUT IT WAS THE STATE. WORK AGAIN
YEAH. AT THE FOR CON ME THEY
WOULD HAVE HAD THE EVIDENCE THAT
HE LIED YEAH. THEY HAD WHAT THEY
WOULD HAVE TAKEN ACTION. INSTEAD
THIRTY EIGHT G. FAT IN THEIR
SINGLE EDGE. PROMISE ME THAT THE
DOCTOR WOULD GO BEFORE A L. J.
J. EDGE EVEN THE PAIN ME TO
APPEAR FOR THIS HEARING. YES
LESS THAN A MONTH BEFORE THE
SCHEDULED HEARING. THE DATE THAT
IN THEIR OFFER. THIS REPEAT
OFFENDER. DR A SETTLEMENT
ALLOWING HIM TO SURRENDER HIS
LICENSE YOU DO A- THE POST
RETIREMENT. AT THIS COMPLAINT
WITH THE PATIENT REGULATIONS IN
PLACE. THE BOARD WOULD HAVE
CAUGHT THE DOCTOR. AFTER THE
INTERVIEW AND SAVE MONEY BUT
MORE IMPORTANTLY STATE BY. A
MANDATORY REPORTER LAW. IS NOT
EFFICIENT BECAUSE DOCTORS ARE
LEAVING HOSPITAL PRIVILEGES AND
WE HAVE NO IDEA IF THE BOARD IF
YOU SEE ONE FATAL FIGHT THE
COURT. I DON'T DOCTOR LOCKED
HOSPITAL. AT EVERY HOSPITAL IN
BAKERSFIELD. YES THERE WAS NO
ACCUSATION FILES ON IT ALL. BOB
DOLE PRIVILEGES ONE HOSPITAL
NATIVE BUT THEY HAVE MADE
ALLOWED MAY HAVE MAY HAVE ABOUT
FIVE. AT THE HOSPITAL THAT THEY
TOOK IT HOSPITAL PRIVILEGES I
MYSELF CONTACTED MARCO ALMOST.
NOW WITH FINE. IT NEVER WOULD BE
BUILT ON CALL. EMAIL NOT ONE
SINGLE TIME MANDATORY COURT
NEEDS TO BE RANKED IN. IT CAN
NOT CONTINUE WITH THE BOARD
FAILED MATTER EVERY FOR SOME
SAMPLES. ALTHOUGH HAVING A
PUBLIC BOARD MEMBER MAJORITY AT
THE FIRST GAPS IN THE BEGINNING
TO PROVIDE CONSUMER PROTECTION.
WE HAVE A POSITION MAJORITY. ALL
LAWS PASSED AT THE COLLISION FOR
DOCTORS LIKE MY DAUGHTERS WILL
HAVE TO CONTINUE TO HARM FAMILY
FOR DECADES AND CONTINUE TO
PRACTICE. WE HAVE OTHER DOCTORS
IN OUR TOWN- HAVE LOST THEIR
LICENSE BUT EVENTUALLY HAVE THEM
REINSTATED AND THE BOARD STILL
CONTINUES EARLY TERMINATION
UNDER PROBATION. STILL MANY
DOCTOR BECAUSE OF WIDESPREAD
HARM YES DAVID CHIU MANY CHANCES
WITH NO RESTRICTIONS. AND IF
THAT HAPPENED UNDER A PHYSICIAN
BOARD MAJORITY THE MEDICAL BOARD
IS SUPPOSED TO. THE MEDICAL
BOARD COURT THE PUBLIC MAJORITY
FOR CAMBER AND THOSE AT THE
PUBLIC AND SO DO I. BY ALSO WERE
HARD. AND HER FUTURE. AND HER
ABILITY TO HAVE A LIFE WITH HER
SON. I WALKED THE STATE. RECEIVE
HER BACHELOR'S IN PSYCHOLOGY. NO
MATTER SHOULD HAVE TO DO THAT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU I
TODAY WATER BEFORE WE MOVE
FORWARD CAN YOU GIVE ME AN IDEA
MANY OTHER CALLERS ARE WAITING
ON THE LINE. AT THIS TIME- WE
HAVE FIVE MORE MISTER CHAIR.
OKAY LET ME JUST SAY THIS I
THINK. IF YOU TOOK A POLL OF MY
COLLEAGUES CERTAINLY THOSE
SECURE COMMITTEES. IN THIS
LEGISLATURE I THINK YOU WOULD
FIND THAT I'M OF. FOR A GENEROUS
WITH RESPECT TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
IN. I WOULD JUSTICE THOSE STILL
WAITING ON THE LINE TO TESTIFY
THAT WHEN YOU TESTIFY. TRY TO
LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS IF YOU CAN
TO THE ISSUES ON THE AGENDA AT
THE SAME TIME WE'RE VERY
INTERESTED IN HEARING. YOUR
COMMENTS SO WITH THAT PLEASE
PROCEED MYSTERY OR NEXT PLEASE.
THANK YOU I NEXT WE'RE GONNA GO
LINE FORTY ONE PLEASE GO AHEAD.
SIX POINT FORTY ONE YOU ARE OPEN. FORTY ONE WOULD YOU PLEASE ON
MUTE. YEAH CAN YOU HEAR ME
PERFECTLY PLEASE PROCEED. ONE
HELLO MY NAME THE DAVID DALY ON
THE NOT FROM BAKERSFIELD. AND A
VOLUNTEER WITH CONSUMER WATCHDOG
MY BEAUTIFUL WIFE AND SON
MALACHI DIED TRAGICALLY AFTER
HIS MONTHLY FIND THE PRODUCTS
THEY'RE WORKING OR SLEEPING AND
TO FACE A POSTMORTEM SEE
FICTION. PROVIDER FILL THEM IN
EVERY WAY POSSIBLE WHICH LED TO
HIM BEING TRANSPORTED AFTER NINE
HOURS THE HOSPITAL WITH THE
RESOURCES TO HELP. I WAS
DISCOURAGED FROM FILING
COMPLAINTS WITH THE BOARD MY SON
WAS REFERRED TO AS A FEEDING
TUBE ED AND DIED MONTHS WITH HIS
MOTHER CASE MY SON WAS
VICTIMIZED TWICE THE SECOND TIME
BEING WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD.
THE STANDARD TURKEY. WITH THE
MEMBER NEED TO BE SET. WORK
STAFF DOES NOT REACH EMAIL OR SO
A LETTER. AFTER THEM. INTERVIEW
YOU CAN'T EVER REACH THEM EVER
AGAIN. THERE NEEDS TO BE
REQUIRED INTERVIEW WITH THE
FAMILY MEMBER BEFORE A COMPLAINT
IS DISMISSED OR IGNORED. THE
FAMILY SHOULD BE NOTIFIED BEFORE
THEY OP BEFORE A SETTLEMENT IS
OFFERED TO THE PROVIDER AND
GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO.
OPERATE VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT.
LEAVE A REALIZE WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT HERE. THE YEARS SPENT
INVESTIGATING CASES IS PUTTING
CALIFORNIANS AT RISK I BELIEVE
THE BURDEN OF PROOF NEEDS TO BE
CHANGE FROM CLEAR AND CONVINCING
EVIDENCE THE PREPONDERANCE OF
EVIDENCE FOR ALL THE AMERICAN.
THE BENEFITS INVESTIGATION BACK
THE ROAD FOR PUBLIC CASES WOULD
BE RESOLVED SOONER WHICH WOULD
TAKE THE BOARD MONEY AND PROVIDE
AN OUTCOME FOR THE FAMILY. OUR
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL CONTINUE
TO OFFER A REPEAT OFFENDER.
DOCTORS PROBATION AND OTHER
SETTLEMENT HE PROMISED ANOTHER
FAMILY DECIDES OR LETTER CASES
WOULD GO TO AN ALJ HEARING BUT
THEY DIDN'T. I WAS EVEN
SUBPOENAED TO APPEAR AT A
HEARING ONLY FOR HAND TO OFFER A
TWENTY FIVE YEAR REPEAT
OFFENDER. A DEAL TO SURRENDER
HIS LICENSE FOR SUPPORTERS. TO
HELP YOU. YOU PLAY A BIG ROLE IN
THE NUMBER OF MOTHERS AND BABIES
SECOND TO DIE. BECAUSE THIS
DOCTOR WAS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE
TO PRACTICE THE CONSUMER INPUT
INTO THE- COMPLAINT AND
IMPORTANT PROCESS WOULD TAKE
CARE OF SOME OF THESE ISSUES
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
COMMENTS AND FOR YOUR BREVITY
CERTAIN THAT BUT FEDERER NEXT
PLEASE. THANK YOU LINE TWENTY
SEVEN YOU ARE OPEN. GOOD
AFTERNOON MY NAME IS MICHELLE
MONSERRAT RAMOS AND I'M TO KATHY
OLSON. AGENT ADVOCATE WITH
CONSUMER WATCHDOG I LOST MY
HUSBAND TO BE MORE IN MONTREAL
ACTION MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE AT THE
HANDS OF THE SUBSTANCE ABUSING
POSITION. DICTATES A CRACK.
COMPLAIN. THE CENTRAL
COMPLAINING THOUGHT LEGISLATIVE
ACTION I PLAYED A IN THE KNOW
FROM HUNDRED THEFT BUSE FOR THE
- I KNOW WORK WITH FAMILY ACROSS
STATE I MEDICAL AMERICA. WE CAN
ALL HAVE ISSUE AND THAT VERY
REGULATORY BOARD. I AM
COMPLETELY ADVOCATE FOR MY TEAM. DR PEPPER BY TO THEIR LIFE.
BUT HARD TO TELL BY LLOYD HAD
THE RIGHT TO THEIR LAW AND
LIVELY AND HEARTY AND IN THE OF
. AT THE RIGHT TO THE AS WELL MY
THERE ON THE LINE. MAYBE WE NEED
A AT YOU KNOW STANDARDS THAT
SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT THAT
CONFLICT IN GUIDELINE THAT WILL
PROTECT HIM. SIMILAR TO
STANDARDS FOR TO BE THE. SANDERS
REGULATIONS K. YOU CAN. AND IT
ENDED UP THAT ARE TO YOU THAT.
WE WILL BE AN EVIDENTIARY
STANDARD MUCH CHANGE TO UPON OF
. ALL CASES JUST THE HOME YOU
CANNOT CREATE A FEW TO. WOULD
YOU IT ALL BUT BROKEN. MARKET
FOR ALL OF ALL. IN MEDICAL WANTS
TO LOW THE BURDEN OF PROOF I
DON'T THINK THAT MANY. CUT DOWN
TALKING THAT TO GET YOU. I KNOW
A LOT MORE TO HAVE THEIR TEETH
WILL BE. MIGHT WIN ALL OF.
CONTACTED THE BOARD WITH A
PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST.
ABOUT THE UNIFIED AND I'VE
GOTTEN HERE. LOCAL HOSPITALS DO
NOT TRUST THE DOCTOR TO TREAT
THEIR PATIENTS HOW CAN THE BOARD
NOT AT. NEED TO GIVE THE TOOL
FOR THE TOLD TO TAKE ACTION.
NEED MORE ACCOUNTABILITY AND
PROCESS. THE PUBLIC IS IF AND-
FIRST HE NEEDS TO SET FOR THE
THEY WERE IN INTO THEM FOR WITH. A COMPLETE UNIT IS NOT A TO IT
THAT ARE HAPPY WE'RE NOT HAPPY
AT THE PROCESS YEAH. THE ONLY
THING GUIDELINES OF A CO. I THAT
I THAT WITH FAMILIES NOW BUT I
MEAN FOR FAMILY BEING. INVESTS
FOR GETTING ANSWERS SUPPORT
EMBEDDED. YOU MEDICAID WILL BE
DISMISSED AT FAMILY INTERVIEW
WITH THE- FOR AN EXCLUSIVE FOR.
IT FOR LET IT WILL NOT BE AND
THE CLOSURE PAY WHICH ONE AND
NOT WITH YOU. THEY ARE NOT
RECEIVING LETTERS THAT ALL AT
THIS POINT. A COMPLAIN MANY UNIT
MAY WORK. THE THREE STEPS THEY
WERE. INTO THE COST IS INCLUDED
. IN MANAGED BY THE YEAR. HELLO
THE PUBLIC. NEED AT TO VOICE
THIS CAPABLE. WHEN OPPOSE THE
RATIONALE. FOR THE IS WE NEED
MORE TWENTY. FOR IN EXPANSION
AND ALL OF FIVE SHOULD NOT BE
FROM THE POSITION PROFILE WHERE
WHO FLED TO THE TWENTY THIRD
MINUTE THE FINANCIALLY THAT
THERE'S EVER THAT THIS IS. WHEN
I ACTUALLY IT MAY OF MENTAL. I
GOT NOTHING WHAT THE CHANGES AND
GETTING YOU LISTED SPENT AND IT
LIFE AND DEATH GET A FUTURE SOME
THIS IS THE BACK. BLATCHLEY IT'S
ONLY BE TO MORE. THE MEDICAL
BOARD SUPPORT THE PUBLIC
MAJORITY AND THE PUBLIC. I'VE
NEVER CLEARED OF THE NEEDS FOR
MORE PUBLIC NAY TO WHEN I. THAT
THIS WE WERE HELP YOU HERE WERE
DOCTORS WILL CHAU BECAUSE JUST.
THE REPUTATION IN THE.
THE REQUESTED A DOCTOR. IN
ANOTHER PANEL HEARING FOR A
DOCTOR THAT WAS TRYING TO
EXPECTATIONS FOR MAYBE EARLY.
HAPPINESS LICENSE REINSTATED
PROTECTION FOR MEMBERS ACTION
MINIMAL IF ANY QUESTIONS THE
PUBLIC BOARD MEMBER AFTER VERY
SPECIFIC QUESTION WHICH WAS
LINKED WITH A MOVE. TO EXPAND
ADDICTION RECOVERY NEED. DOCTOR
COULDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION THE
COMPLETELY. UNRAVELED IN FRONT
OF THE- ASSEMBLY IT MELTED.
PHYSICAL ABUSE OF THE. THESE ARE
INCREDIBLY BIG PUTTING HEALTH
YEAH WOULD AND THE PUBLIC BOARD
ARE SHOWING MORE IT. AND I
HANDLE OF THESE PALACES. FOR YOU
NEXT PLEASE. WE HAVE A LINE
FIFTY FIVE. HELLO MY NAME IS
REALLY VAN. PLEASE PROVIDE. YEAH
I'M FROM IN. TO WATCH OUT I
MEDICAL BATTERY DURING THE DELAY
OF MY DAD WITHOUT MY CONSENT.
AND WITH NO MEDICAL REASON
DIDN'T YOU AUTOMATE WELL WHAT HE
CALL IN A FEW THE ARMY WITH MY-
AND WITH NO WE- WHAT HE
BASICALLY DID WAS. MUTILATE MY
JANET. BY ME SLOWLY ONE ONE ALL
THE WAY DOWN TO MY- AIMED AT I
KNOW THIS BECAUSE- I WOULD
PUSHING BABY WHAT COME OUT BACK
THAT UP. BEFORE THIS THE WHOLE
TEAM HAD TO WARNED THAT I CAN
BEEN A BIG OF A BRUTAL. BOB OF
ME. AND- THE PRETTY MUCH WORSE
THAN THAT. I HAVE LIFELONG
DAMAGE THEY SUFFER FROM TRAUMA.
AND MY GENITALS ARE STILL ON
SCENE. MIKE EIGHT ELLO MARC ECHO
THROUGH THE PROCESS LEAVING MY
DOG JUST THE LIFE. PORGY ENDED
UP DYING. LARA THE BURDEN OF
PROOF IS ENOUGH TO FOR THE- HE
SAID. MORE KEATON WOULD GO TO
INVESTIGATE THE BURDEN OF WAS
LOW IN THE END. WHAT HAVE TO
SPEND SO MUCH TIME WITH ME
PLEASE. WHAT WOULD BE THE BOARD
MONEY AND MORE IMPORTANT THE
FLIGHT. FORTY ONE OTHER STATES
HAVE A PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
. OTHERS THAT THERE IS LITTLE TO
CAN WITH THE YEAH. PROCESS
IMPROVE SO MUCH FOR THE AND
JUSTICE FOR THE THAT IF YOU.
STAND FOR COMMUNITY WITH THE-
FAMILY MEMBER. MANY FROM ARE TO.
WITH NO IN FROM THE BOY NEEDS TO
ENTER. THE COMPANY FAMILY MY
BEFORE. EIGHT QUALITY OF CARE OR
DEATH. EIGHT TWENTY TO BE
CONTACTED AT THE VISIT AND YOUR-
BUT WE CAN PROVIDE THE POOR WITH
ONCE OF THE- ORINDA OFF A
SETTLEMENT THE FOURTEENTH. THE
COMPLAINANT MEMBER. AND
OPPORTUNITIES THE IMPACT. THE
MEDICAL BOARD PUBLIC FOR A
PUBLIC MEMBER. IT ALREADY IN
LIKE IT'S- THE- PROCESS WHAT I'M
WITH MORE PUBLIC BY MEMBERS OF
FOR MY- AFTER DOCTORS OF
QUESTION. BECAUSE THEY HAVE
ALREADY THEIR CRIMES WITH A LOT
OF WITH IT UP MEMBERS BUT THE
DON'T HAVE THE VOTES NEEDED TO
MAKE A DIFFERENCE YES THEY WERE
. NEED TO BE CHANGED DOCTORS
MONICA. THEIR PROBATION TERM. OF
THEIR LIFE OF A DOCTOR SOMEONE
WHO. THAT HIS LIFE. OF ALL HE
SHOULD. RIGHT TO FULFILL HIS
BIRTH. FOUR ME FOR
TRANSFORMATION. WHAT HIS LACK OF
THIS RANT SO MANY OF THE FOR THE
ARE BEING EARLY TERMINATION OF
PROBATION WITH THE PRODUCT
BECAUSE FOR THE AND IT'S NOT THE
OF CONSUMER. THE ONLY BE I'M
EVEN SPEAKING. BECAUSE I'M LUCKY
TO BE ALIVE. AND IT IS AN HONOR
FOR ME TO BE HERE. AND THE ONLY
REASON I'M IS BECAUSE FOR OTHER
WOMEN OR BE AT THE CAR. MY DAD
BRUTALLY STABBED. AND DESTROY MY
CHEN. THANK BOB THANK YOU HAVE A
NICE DAY THIRTY FOR YOUR
PURCHASE TO WHEN MODERATOR NOT
PLEASE. YOUR LINE SIXTY SIX.
AFTER CAN YOU SHOW ME. RICKLY
PLEASE PROCEED- THANK YOU FOR
MARCH ALL MY NAME WILL I AM A
QUITE. AT THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
AND I LOVE MY JOB I DO WAY WITH. FOR AT LEAST SIX YEARS IN THE
IN THE SETTING IN THE FOR. THE
LAST THING HAVE BEEN QUITE
CHALLENGING- IN FOCUS TODAY WILL
BE MORE LIKE MOSTLY ON THE-
ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. THE IN
ORDER TO BRIEFLY BECAUSE A TWO
ZERO EIGHT BECAUSE I THINK IT
RELATES TO THEM ABJECT. OF THE
MEETING- I. OF MEETING THROUGH
WHAT I OF WAR AND TO BECOME AND
I HE MEANS- I MEAN IT I THINK
I'M SORRY THESE OF BREATH IT'S
BEEN REALLY. SHE FOR ME. BECAUSE
I TO CHILDREN. I FEEL LIKE I
NEED TO SHOW UP FROM FACE SOME
OF THE- I AM UP GOING FOR ABOUT
. AND I WILL EVEN A MONTH INTO
THE- AND- REALLY HELPING LOT
REMEMBER MA'AM I'M NOT A MEMBER
. WE JUST HAD A YOU THIS HEARING
IS NOTHING TO DO. COVERT NOW.
MASKING VACCINES. THIS HAS TO DO
WITH THE MEDICAL BOARD OF
CALIFORNIA AND SOME PROPOSALS
FOR. REFORMS TO THE MEDICAL
BOARD PROCEDURES AND PROCESS
SEES. IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING
AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE PROVIDING
TESTIMONY WELL. YEAH BECAUSE
WHAT I UNDERSTAND A DOCTOR THAT
TOLD ME COULD BE POSSIBLY
DISCIPLINE FOR UNPROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT- EIGHT THAT'S MY
UNDERSTANDING FROM- AN- INMATE
AND I JUST. FIND IT WRONG SO
THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO CALL AND
- BRIEFLY IF THE FACT. WHAT THE
LATE. TELL YOUR CURE RELATE TO
THE WHY VISIT ARE DIS. OKAY I'M
NOT SURE THAT ONE OF THE I'M NOT
SURE THAT'S ONE OF THE REFORM
PROPOSALS BUT PLEASE CONTINUE.
RIGHT WELL. WHAT AND WHAT I WAS
TRYING TO IMAGINE AND I'VE
NOTICED IN RECENT LEGISLATURE
SOME VIEW THAT WOULD BE AIMING-
THE TRIP. SOME OF THE DOCTORS
WHAT AT OBSERVATIONAL CONTACT
AND I FIND IS THAT THE- IT MIGHT
BE A LITTLE BIT. THE. THANK WHAT
I'M TRYING TO SAY. SHE I'M
TRYING TO MAKE SURE I. YOU THE
RIGHT LANGUAGE I FIND IT- BUT
THAT WAS MMHM CALIFORNIANS AND
THOSE DOCTORS ACTUALLY HELPING
AND WE NEED TO KIND OF LIKE.
YEAH MAYBE I CAN HELP YOU IF
THIS IS AN ASSEMBLY BILL HAVING
TO DO WITH PHYSICIAN PRACTICE WE
HAVEN'T HEARD THOSE IN THE
SENATE YET IF THE BILL MOVES
FROM THE ASSEMBLY TO THE SENATE
WE WILL BE HEARING. THE ASSEMBLY
BILL- LATER THIS YEAR ASSUMING
IT COMES TO THIS COMMITTEE SO
MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A BETTER
TIME FOR YOU TO EXPRESS YOUR-OPINION ON THE BILL BECAUSE
WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH THE BILL
TODAY. RIGHT AND WHAT IT MY-
DOCTOR WAS ACTUALLY IN FRONT OF
THE MEDICAL BOARD- I BELIEVE TWO
WEEKS AGO. AND I THINK IT WAS. I
AM I LET MY DOCTOR AND I WOULD
LIKE YOU TO BE A DOCTOR BECAUSE
I HE HELPED ME. IN THE I. LEAGUE
OF THAT. TOTAL RETURN. WHAT
APPRECIATE YOUR CALL TODAY MA'AM
AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING
FROM YOU IF AND WHEN THE BILL
GETS TO US AND WE HAVE A HEARING
ON THIS BILL THAT YOU FOR TWO I
HAVE NOT SEEN IT YET SO. PLEASE
FEEL FREE TO CALL BACK THEN OKAY
. HELLO. MODERATOR NEGATIVE NEXT
PLEASE THANK YOU THE PREVIOUS
ONE WAS CLOSED THAT'S ALL THERE
IS NO RESPONSE- AND THERE ARE NO
FOR THE LINES IN Q. THANK YOU.
MR MODERATOR- WITH THAT I'D LIKE
TO THANK THE MEMBERS OF OUR-
MIDDIES WHO PARTICIPATED TODAY
AND THOSE WHO WERE LISTENING
FROM THEIR DISTRICT OFFICES
DURING THIS INFORMATION HEARING
OR THEIR CAPITOL OFFICES. BUT
ALSO LIKE TO THANK MEMBERS OF
THE PUBLIC FOR SHARING. COMMENTS
REGARDING THE REFORM PROPOSALS
ON THE AGENDA AND FOR SHARING
THEIR STORIES ARE VERY IMPORTANT
STORIES IN FOR WAY WEIGHING IN
ON THE PROCEEDINGS TODAY- I WILL
SAY THIS- TO THE MEDICAL BOARD
PARTICIPANTS STILL LISTENING.
YOU KNOW- GIVEN THE TESTIMONY
THAT- AS I RECALL THAT
INVESTIGATIVE EFFORTS
ESSENTIALLY ARE THE SAME AND
WILL CONTINUE TO BE THE SAME
REGARDLESS OF THE INITIAL
ALLEGATIONS AND- IN THE CUP
COMPLAINT. BEFORE YOU AND
PRESUMABLY THE EVIDENTIARY
STANDARD APPLIED. I'M HOPING TO
SEE SOME DATA FROM THE MEDICAL
BOARD AS TO HOW OUTCOMES AND
PROCESSING TIMES WOULD CHANGE IF
WE WERE TO CHANGE THE EVIDENCE
FREE STANDARD. FROM CLEAR AND
CONVINCING TO A PREPONDERANCE OF
THE EVIDENCE TO TRY TO ASSESS.
THE BENEFIT OR NOT OF THAT
EVIDENCE THREE CHANGE IN THE
PROCEEDINGS. SO HOPEFULLY
SOMEONE TOOK SOME NOTES AND WE
CAN HAVE A CONTINUED
CONVERSATION ON THAT AT A LATER
DATE. SO TO THOSE LISTING IF YOU
WERE NOT ABLE TO TESTIFY VIA
TELECONFERENCE ORVIS FOR ONE
REASON OR ANOTHER PLEASE SUBMIT
YOUR COMMENTS. OR YOUR
SUGGESTIONS IN WRITING TO THE
SENATE BUSINESS PROFESSIONS AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE.
FOR THE ASSEMBLY BUSINESS AND
PROFESSIONS COMMITTEE OR VISIT
OUR PARTICULAR COMMITTEE WEBSITE
YOUR COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
ARE VERY VERY IMPORTANT TO US WE
WANT TO INCLUDE YOUR TESTIMONY.
IN THE OFFICIAL RECORD RECORDS
HEARING RECORDS OF THIS SENATE
COMMITTEE. SO PLEASE DO SO.
THANK YOU AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR
PARTICIPATION. WE'VE CONCLUDED
OUR AGENDA TODAY AND WITH THAT
THIS OVERSIGHT HEARING OF THE
SENATE BUSINESS PROFESSIONS AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE.
IS ADJOURNED.