THE INNOCENCE PROJECT OF THE CENTER FOR PEER REVIEW JUSTICE

If you are aware of a hospital that ignores safety and uses its bylaws to benefit and shield corporate doctors and nurses and retaliates against independent doctors please call the Innocence Project.

If you are an independent doctor who has suffered an unjust report to the National Practitioner's Data bank (NPDB) from a malpractice settlement or professional review please call the Innocence Project.

If you have been the subject of a Sham Peer Review, a Bad Faith Peer Review or any abuse of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 ( HCQIA), we would like to know. We want to shine the light on hospital fraud, clear the names of the good guys and bring the bad guys to justice ! Call the Innocence Project.

Your call will be confidential and you are protected from retaliation by the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005. info@PeerReview.org  504-621-1670

Dr Willner Featured in Orlando Medical News - Follow Link

Mission: The purpose of The Center for Peer Review Justice is to:

  • Consulting Sham Peer Review Defense

  • spotlight sham medical peer review

  • provide resources for both victims of sham peer review and their legal counsel

  • work together to bring about legislative and judicial change

  • network to voice concerns regarding due process, confidentiality and the politics involved in the medical professions

  • share our victories and defeats

Preamble - What we believe in!

Follow link for Peer Review Solutions!
Richard's articles, "thank you" notes and testimonials are
included in our newest website.

Services offered by the Center….

  1. "Extra" Judicial or "Extra"-legal services. Necessary services that your lawyer does not offer  The opposing side enjoys "immunity" and as such, it takes away any advantage the Peer Reviewed Doctor might have
  2. Management of the media to get the truth out
  3. Consulting Sham Peer Review Defense
  4. Legal Consulting by Center lawyers
  5. Negotiation
  6. Legal Referral Service.  "The best lawyer is not the most expensive one."
  7. Lectures on "Physician Peer Review Abuse" and/or  State Medical Board Abuse to your organization or medical society
  8. Other services

LECTURES

We are available to lecture and have presentations on the following topics:

  1. Physician Peer Review Abuse (Sham Peer Review)
  2. State Medical Board Abuse
  3. National Practitioner Database Solutions
  4. A topic of your choice

Call The Center at 504-621-1670 or email us for details

Sign Up For Quick Response From

Peer Review Justice

Dr Willner addresses the Republican National Committee
Dr Willner Knows How the System Works!

Gearing Up for a National
 PR Blitz

We now have Members actively Involved to Take your Queries and Defend our Profession

Dallas, Austin, Houston, New York City, Lincoln IL, Chicago, Miami FL, Boca Raton, Seattle, San Francisco, Las Vegas, San Diego, Boulder CO, New Orleans, Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, Gadsden AL, Lexington, New Haven, Boston, Little Rock... more being added as commitments continue lining up

We have 3 dedicated servers with redundant backups to handle bandwidth, send and receive large attachments & faxes, and our huge database collection. Developing open-source blogs, many private member groups on facebook to address the different facets by locale, profession, and discrimination cause.

Sham Peer Review and Increased Physician Suicide Risk

by Richard Willner, CEO
The Center for Peer Review Justice

Various stressors have been correlated to physician suicide, including: personal, financial, and profession.

[i] Anyone who has been under pressure from a legitimate review process will readily tell you that it can be stressful. If the review is a sham, the stressful nature of the review increases dramatically.

This unnecessary stress may increase the risk of depression and suicide in the physicians exposed to sham peer reviews.

Generally, suicide results from depression, which is either untreated or inadequately treated and accompanied by the “knowledge of and access to lethal means.”[ii]

Interestingly, a study of 47 physicians who were followed for a 30-year period “concluded that long hours, demanding patients, and ready access to narcotics were not problems for physicians who did not have preexisting psychological difficulties evident at college entry.”[iii]

Although the two major risk factors for suicide are mental disorders and substance use disorders, because most individuals with these disorders do not commit suicide, other risk factors are involved, such as “stressful events and predisposing factors (eg, impulsivity).”[iv]

Certainly, experiencing any peer review can be a ‘stressful event,’ but a sham peer review poses an inordinate amount of stress because it is difficult for the provider under review to use definable defenses in the review process.

For example, in a typical morbidity and mortality conference an adverse surgical or clinical outcome is openly discussed, and the provider in question may have considerable answering to do regarding the care rendered in that case.

In that situation, at least the provider knows the object of the review, how to respond, and how to improve his or her understanding to better approach similar situations in the future.

However, in the case of an adverse sham peer review action, the provider would not know what was coming, why it was coming, or how to prepare.

He or she is socked with an adverse action with little to no ability to honestly be heard. This results in enormous levels of stress that may be a trigger to developing psychological squeal, and in the most extreme cases, suicide.

Factors that tend to be protective against suicide include: “effective treatment for mental and physical disorders, social and family support, resilience and coping skills, religious faith, and restricted access to lethal means.”[v]

Effective treatment for physicians has similar barriers as to the general populations as evidenced in a study involving medical students, including: “lack of time (48%), lack of confidentiality (37%), stigma (30%), cost (28%), and fear of documentation on academic record (24%).[vi]

Herein lies a major problem, as the protective factors are not as effectively available for physicians.

Practicing physicians with psychiatric disorders often encounter overt or covert discrimination in medical licensing, hospital privileges, health insurance, and/or malpractice insurance. . . [I]t is not known whether medical boards use the information to covertly discriminate against a physician who was treated or previously impaired but does not report current impairment.[vii]

An expert panel noted that in some states, “licensing boards conduct investigations if physicians seek psychiatric treatment, a process that can lead to sanctioning regardless of whether there is any evidence of impaired functioning.”[viii]

As the admission of any psychiatric problem could end their medical careers, many physicians “suffer in silence.”[ix] According to one surgeon who has suffered with depression, “You just would rather take a risk with your health than your career.

It’s not like you get a second chance with it.”[x] Sadly, it has been estimated that approximately 400 physicians die each year from suicide.[xi] Another sad statistic is the suicide completion rate for physicians is significantly higher than the general population.[xii]

If sham reviews could be entirely eliminated and the ability for practitioners to receive effective treatment without the negative ramifications noted above, it is possible that the many physicians who “suffer silently” might be reduced.

However, the present situation is that sham reviews do occur and the stigma of seeking appropriate psychological and psychiatric care is real.

Likewise, defending against sham peer reviews and spurious board actions through the legal system is fraught with many difficulties at great monetary costs to the victim practitioner. It is important to understand that addressing the problem of sham peer review through an organization with vast experience will afford a level of comfort, reassurance, and hope.

One of the protective factors against suicide comes in the form of “support.” While the article cited above mentioned support in the form of “social and family support,” additional support from an organization that offers genuine solutions to a seemingly impossible situation obviously comes within the realm of support that most would need to aid them in coping with the unnecessary burdens of stress due to sham peer review.

The Center for Peer Review Justice specializes in helping those Physicians and Surgeons who are going thru the Sham of a Peer Review or State Board Abuse. It offers excellent Sham Peer Review defense as well as free excellent advice 24-7.

The Doctors of CPRJ genuinely listen and genuinely help as “No Doctor is left behind”. The hotline that is answered by a real caring doctor is 504-621-1670.

[i] American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs, Physician Mortality and Suicide: Results and Implications of the AMA-APA Pilot Study. 50 Conn. Med. , 37-43 (1986).
[ii] Louise B. Andrew, et al. Physician Suicide. Medscape Reference. Updated May 26, 2011.
[iii] Claudia Center, et al. Confronting Depression and Suicide in Physicians. JAMA, Vol. 289, No. 23, 3163 (June 18, 2003).
[iv] Id.
[v] Id.
[vi] Id. At 3164.
[vii] Id.
[viii] Tracy Hampton, PhD. Experts Address Risk of Physician Suicide. JAMA, Vol. 294, No. 10 (Sept. 14, 2005).
[ix] Lindsey Tanner. Medical Know-How Raises Suicide Risk for Doctors. USA Today. May 8, 2008.
[x] Id.
[xi] See note 2.
[xii] Id.

Availability of Information to Patients as an Offset to Sham Peer Review

by Richard Willner, CEO

The Center for Peer Review Justice

The present scheme for providing information to patients that would presumably allow patients to minimize their own risks involving the treatment by various doctors is not perfect, to say the very least. Currently, state licensure boards and other disciplinary bodies regulate the flow of physician quality parameters. This type of information only reflects negative findings once a review is initiated, which does not enable patients to make informed decisions. However, the means by which health care quality is assessed is changing.

What implications will the health information revolution have for the health care regulatory framework? One possible answer is that the health information revolutions should prompt us to regulate less. A patient with access to information about individual provider's quality of care, for example, would have less need for state medical boards assistance in rooting out poor quality providers . . .. A second possible answer is that the health information revolution should prompt us to regulate more. Information imperfections will persist forever, so regulation can at least potentially benefit some patients. Because information about quality is an input into the regulation process, and technological innovation has reduced the cost of such information, we can regulate more cheaply than we once could. Kristin Madison, Regulating Health Care Quality in an Information Age, 40 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1577 (2007).

The question as to whether more openly available information will best serve the interest of patients, or whether this availability will afford a new and improved means of effectively publicizing a sham peer review is not clear. In a Utopian sense, if the actual quality of the provider's services were available in an unbiased manner, patients would indeed be armed with an effective tool to assist them in finding the most suitable provider for their needs. Unfortunately, the real world of kangaroo courts and sham reviews destroys this ideal. The public is informed, of course, in terms of what is reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank and in the form of board orders. This does not insure the information is factually correct, especially when the individuals providing the information to the data banks have immunity and may have pecuniary interests in the information provided. Thus, the present form of providing information to the public to improve the public safety and welfare is significantly flawed.

A hypothetical patient that moves to a new city may seek information as to which provider they should see for a given need. In Utopia, the patient could find information regarding providers with the highest ratings for various services or conditions. Instead, in Real America, the patient sees only the names of the providers who remain on staff at the facility of choice without knowing who might be better for their given need. The best provider, in fact, may not be listed due to a sham review that removed that provider from the staff; hence, the patient would never be aware of that provider. Perhaps, the economic interests of those in control of the peer review process came ahead of maintaining the best provider on the staff. Perhaps, a negative report was generated against the provider that would have best served the patient's needs, which obviously places the provider on the DO NOT USE list for services – to the average patient. The average person looking to receive healthcare does not understand the intricacies of sham peer review versus genuine reviews based on true competency and safety concerns. This is Real America, not Utopia. Sadly, this can and does happen.

Until an appropriately regulated Utopian informational system becomes available, sham peer reviews will continue. There is a solution. The Center for Peer Review Justice can manage the sham peer review defense and help with the abuse from the State Medical Boards.

Newest Offering from CPRJ

2010 Winner of the Semmelweis Society's Clean Hands Award!!

26 Oct – Nashville - The Board of Directors is proud to announce that Dr. Richard Willner DPM, is the Semmelweis Society International “Clean Hands Award” recipient for 2010.

Tireless Advocate

 

Civil litigation is not for everyone, but Dr. Willner has successfully kept physicians employed – even when facing seemingly hopeless odds.

“Litigation is very time-consuming.  One is out of the operating room for prolonged periods of time, it costs a fortune and the rate of success is very poor,” says Willner.

In one case, Dr. Willner’s work led to the resignation of an entire State Podiatric Medical Board.

Among the many ‘thank you’ letters are examples of gratitude for expunging records, reinstated licenses, and prevented data banking – cases that included a neurologist subjected to a criminal trial.  Thanks to Dr. Willner, his medical license was reinstated.

Dr. Willner applies a sound approach to prevent Data Banking by counseling physicians labeled as “disruptive” and getting them back into practice within the specified time limits.  In extreme cases, he has had cases expunged entirely.

SSI commends Dr. Willner for untold hours of mentoring and counseling.  His body of work attests to his love of medicine and deep admiration for honorable physicians.

For more information about Dr. Willner, contact us:

Center for Peer Review Justice

Announcing the honoree of the Center for Peer Review Justice Award

 Healthcare Reporter of the Year

Steve Twedt of the Pittsburg Post Gazette

"The Cost of Courage"

How To Protect Physician Whistleblower Patient
Advocates from Retaliation
 

Sign Up for Alerts

Just provide your email for the Latest News!

Your personal information will be kept in strict confidence
and only used to answer your questions or update you on events.
 

Specialty: Consulting Sham Peer Review Defense

CPRJ:  Development of PR and Media Department

The CPRJ began after the crusade to prove the innocence of a single physician.  In 2000, a podiatrist named Brian Gale worked for the head of the North Dakota Podiatry Board, and they subsequently had a falling out.  Brian then began working for a group called Bismarck, which was in direct competition to his previous employer, the head of the board.  After this move, he began being terrorized by the Podiatric Board.  After filing suit, he twice lose in the Court of Appeals, then at the North Dakota Supreme Court.

In despair, and without any further avenues to pursue, he wrote a letter to fellow members of the profession and asked for their help.  In stepped his savior, Dr. Richard Willner.  Dr. Willner was curious as to how a physician with 4 years of residency training, the longest available residency for podiatrists, could possibly be such a "bad doctor"  Of note, Dr. Gale had not a single malpractice suit.  Brian Gale sent him 29 pounds of documents regarding his case, and Dr. Willner poured through these documents giving each his undivided attention.  

At this time, the CPRJ initiated a public relations and media firm that became so powerful, it salvaged Dr. Gale's professional reputation, reinstated him in podiatric medicine, and resulted in the resignation of ALL the members of the North Dakota Board of Podiatric Medicine.  As time passed, this public relations firm has continued to grow and become more influential.  Through the utilization of technology and multiple databases, the CPRJ has been essential in highlighting problems with sham peer review and exposing those individuals who participate in this practice.  These databases include healthcare writers of every national newspaper in the United States, many thousands of healthcare blogs, and every major television reporter covering healthcare stories.

The CPRJ has recently partnered with women's groups to specifically crusade for women faced with disparities in the medical workplace.  These women's groups include political advocacy groups, women's blogs, individuals focused on women's studies in universities, and women politicians.  The database formed with these partnerships includes demographic data which is maintained by a battery of committed volunteers nationwide.

The CPRJ database is used in the plight for physician justice. The headquarters are located in Dallas, Texas, but this information is backed up in several states.  With 11 years under its belt, the CPRJ has become exponentially more powerful than it was even in the beginning years of 2000.  From the beginning, the CPRJ has sustained public relations for greater than a year for those affected.  Physicians involved in sham peer review can finally even the playing field and have the chance to stand up for what they believe in:  a true and just system.

CPRJ has partnered with the fastest growing medical society, the America's Medical Society, www.AmericasMedicalSociety.com , to extend it's reach to Medical doctors, Osteopaths, Podiatrists, Nurses, Physician therapists,  Occupational Therapists, Pharmacists, etc

 

Slave Labor and Liability?
The Effect of EMTALA on Physicians

Where do the complaints come from?

Medical Tuesday Network
 Physicians, Professional and Information Technology Communities
 Networking to Restore Accountability in HealthCare & Medical Practice
Have you Joined?

 Conferences - More TBA

Dr Richard Willner,  Faculty member in Seattle Conference
 Thrive - Not JUST Survive III: "Shark Proof Your Practice"

Agenda from San Antonio Conference
 Thrive - Not JUST Survive II: "Shark Proof Your Practice"



Dr Willner quoted or featured in the Media
(click on link to read article)

Should " DUE PROCESS RIGHTS " be part of hospital peer review?

By Judge Scott E. Segall and William Pearl, MD

....There is no federal statute that requires peer review committees to observe due process, which the Supreme Court has defined as giving written notice of the actions contemplated, convening a hearing, allowing both sides to present evidence at the hearing, and having an independent adjudicator 

 ... Because the HCQIA mandates the reporting of disciplinary actions of peer review committees to the National Practitioner Data Bank, such a report could harm a physician's career throughout the nation

... Additionally, there is no requirement that the physician be given notice and an opportunity to be heard, and there is no requirement that members of the peer review committee be unbiased. The HCQIA recommends that the physician should get notice of the allegations, time to prepare for a hearing, a list of witnesses, the right to legal counsel, and an impartial fact finder.

... However, the act concludes "A professional review body's failure to meet the conditions described in this subsection shall not, in itself, constitute failure to meet the standards of this act)." This failure of the HCQIA to require due process calls into question the fundamental fairness of the medical peer review system..

...The purpose of requiring due process is to ensure that the actions taken are not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. Where there is no due process, the system invites abuse  

...Peer review in its current form fails to protect an investigated physician from committee members having an economic or personal bias. Economic bias occurs when a committee member has a financial interest in the outcome. 

...Personal bias is inevitable when coworkers judge each other. Some people are very likable, and others illuminate the room by their absence.

...Federal law prohibits a federal judge from hearing cases in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned or in which he has a financial interest (11). The same standards should apply to member of a peer review committee. The potential for abuse when these suggested procedures are not followed would indicate the need for mandatory due process.

 ...The effects of an adverse peer review decision are no longer limited to the relationship between a physician and a hospital. The decision becomes part of the National Practitioner Data Bank. Medical peer review must provide physicians the protections of due process.

These are excerpts...for Full Article follow Link  

Slander by Medical Experts

What to do when your lawyer
did not give you the success he implied

6/15/04 - Herrera to get license back
Montgomery County judge reverses commission's decision!!!

6/4/2004 - JFK hospital reinstates high-risk heart surgeon>

Dr. Lancelot "Lance" Lester, a top Palm Beach County heart surgeon who was suspended last summer by JFK Medical Center over "quality of care" issues, has been reinstated by the hospital.

Lester, who specializes in treating high-risk patients, is expected to be back in the operating room within a few weeks, hospital spokeswoman Madelyn Passarella said Thursday.

Plaintiff wins Case against Databank!!!
Cuthbert O Simpkins, MD pages 1-7

"JOHN DOE, MD" V. DATABANK WIN 
EMAIL  LEGAL@PEERREVIEW.ORG FOR DETAILS

A PEER REVIEW WIN!!! - David M Odom, MD - Alaska

OTHER PEER REVIEW WINS !!!!!  
PLEASE E-MAIL  LEGAL@PEERREVIEW.ORG OR CALL  504-621-1670

Probing legal questions  - you need to ask when charges are brought against you
                  - we will help you find answer for at the Center for Peer Review Justice
- Consulting Sham Peer Review Defense

Are "TIME", "NEWSWEEK" and "USA TODAY" Going To Be
Investigating ....

Hospital Peer Review Issues

Join the Battle!

Follow link for

Peer Review Justice

What Others are Saying about the Center

I do not showcase our wins as people deserve their privacy. However, I do show their "Thank you notes" with their initials.

  • Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 12:48 PM
    Subject: thank you
    Rich,

    Just under a year ago, I was in danger of losing my career. I was thrown into an experience which was horrifying, stressful, expensive, and downright degrading. I was being attacked. When I first spoke with you, I was afraid you would think I was a horrible person (as those shammers would have one believe.)
    You listened and saw the truth and helped me; you stuck with me and we ended up victorious. I wanted to thank you for all your help. that sounds so trite in comparison to all you did for me. You truly are a saint. You even took the time to speak with me late at night when I would call terrified about keeping my career. You are intelligent, committed, energetic, and innovative; and you have many good friends in many places. You are dedicated to your work and to doing the right thing whatever it takes. I commend you.
    You are probably responsible for many lives being saved that you don't even know of. Why? Because you save the practices of those physicians who are the good ones, who get wrongly accused by the bad ones. You really should be sainted or knighted or something like that. Words do not do justice to express my heartfelt appreciation to you!

    Sincerely,
    L.G., MD
     

  • Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 2:52 PM
    Dr. Willner,

    I just want to express my heart felt gratitude towards you. I truly believe God put you in my life as a guardian angel. When I first contacted you, I felt relieved just to have someone to talk to who believed in me and offered me guidance throughout this whole process. I had no idea what a huge role you would play in helping me get my license. Throughout the months, I have not always known exactly what your plans would be or what you were doing behind the scenes, but now in looking back, it all makes sense. I know I say this a lot, but I definitely feel as though you were made for doing what you do. You have the knowledge and experience to correct the wrongs of the medical field, but above all, you have the heart. You have a heart of gold and truly care about people, and that is why you are so successful.

    The past few weeks leading up to the medical board hearing were so stressful and I could not have gotten through it without you. I can never express enough to you my gratitude for you driving all the way down here to be at my side during the hearing. Without you, I would not have a license or a career in medicine. You have made a friend for life. Please let me know if there is anything I can ever do for you...

    KMS, MD
     

  • Sent: Mon, October 11, 2010 12:16:43 PM
    Subject: Thank you

    Dr. Willner,

    Thank you for your hard work and invaluable insights with regard to handling disciplinary matters with the medical board. Your approach to handling these matters helped avoid a deportation because the lack of due process protections in medical board matters may frustrate favorable resolution through the adversarial legal processes available to physicians.

    WPR

    A letter from the Hospital following a killer sham?

That is a first. Who would believe it?

Articles and Notices on Peer Review
 Readers Response to Bad Faith Peer Review
 
Is Peer Review Worth Saving?
 
Medical staffs need autonomy A California case seeks to protect hospital staff independence -- AMEDNews.com, Sept 15, 2003
 
What Every Physicians Should Know
 
Texas medical board funding will help root out bad doctors - AMEDNews.com, July 21, 2003
The Shamming of Physicians and Other Providers -excellent newsletter on peer review from Allan Tobias, MD, JD
 
AAPS Discussion thread on the Center for Peer Review Justice
 
Have privileges at a Specialty Hospital? Read this!
 
Do Physicians Have Civil Rights?
 
Fox Guarding the Hen House
 
Link To Read from June 9 Issue of TIME Magazine
 
Due Process or Professional Assassination?
 
Be ready for battle when you invest - cover story form Healthleaders 12/02
 
AMA Policies Regarding Due Process
 
Should due process be part of hospital peer review?   
 
Regarding Dr Gale's Debacle
 
Good things happen to bad people
 
The Hunted Physician
 
Specialty Versus General Hospitals and Economic Credentialing
 
Dr Mc Cord writes on Board Complaints
 
Dr Waite, founder of Semmelweis Society speaks on Medical RICO
 
ABUSE OF PEER REVIEW IS WIDESPREAD
 
The Semmelweis Society Meeting - Sham Peer Review
 
How To Destroy You Competitor  - primer on how sham review is practiced
 
The Smoking Gun... letter from Senator

Web Site Links
Organizational Sites
America's Medical Society our newest partner also on
Peer Review Solutions  addresses solutions for the problem
Medical Student Loans -   resource site for those dealing with medical student loans
HCQIA - Health Care Quality Act - Learn how it impacts your practice of medicine, and how it can be abused
The Disruptive Physician's Center -  Offers guidance and support to those who have been labeled "disruptive"
Association of American Physicians  and Surgeons
Electronic Frontier Foundation -  Federal Court Upholds Anonymous Speech on Internet
Institute for Safe Medical Practices - follow for discussion of medical errors

Defining the terms-- (more listed in Members Only section)

Definition of Professional Misconduct
Peer Review Principals - general concept of peer review- multi-disciplinary
Due Process Rule
Additional Definition of Professional Misconduct, Limited Application
(CA) Background Paper on Medical Peer Review - defines "805 report"
Requirements for the Dr Expert Witness
The Power of Words

Legal/Judicial -  (more listed in Members Only section)

Links for Legal Research - includes legal precedents
Heath Hippo: Quality Assurance - US Statutes and Administrative Codes

Databank Lists of Medical Professionals -(more listed in Members Only section)

Professional Misconduct and Physician Discipline - goes back 10 years with monthly summaries (note many of the physicians on these list live and worked in many states other than NY - over 12,000 disciplined physicians are listed)
Federation of State Boards  - docinfo.org
National Practitioner Data Baset

National Practitioner Data Base Fact Sheet

GETTING A NEW JOB.

THERE IS A LOT OF EXTRA WORK NECESSARY TO GET A NEW JOB AFTER A SHAM PEER REVIEW AND DATA BANKING.  THE CENTER FOR PEER REVIEW JUSTICE MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP YOU WITH HEADHUNTING, CREDENTIALING, DATABANK REPAIR, GETTING MALPRACTICE INSURANCE OR A LOWER RATE,  ETC.

If you have been unfairly "Databanked" please call our President at  504-621-1670.  Perhaps there is action that you can take.   

Physician Victims of Sham Peer Review - (more listed in Members Only section)

Dr. Brian Gale - podiatrist in North Dakota. It's bad news when your competition "owns" the State Board of your specialty. A Peer Review Justice client that has his license back and is catching up on his bills! I have the scars of a sham peer review!
Oct 17, 2006 - Jay Schindler, MD, a neurosurgeon, won a major victory today when the Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment under HCQIA was DENIED (as to the relevant parties) today in his federal lawsuit in Wisconsin.

Jay is a really credible, honest and driven physician. Patient care is his passion in life and he was frankly a victim of his own success, being shammed only because he was more efficient and productive than his competitors. His ouster was based essentially on a single complicated case. He and his wife Jean have fought courageously against the powerful defendants in his case and today it paid off.
Dr. Steven Dilsaver - Outstanding psychiatrist wishes to return to his home state of California to practice medicine and is placed on severe probation in spite of begin licensed in several other states and being a widely recognized researcher and author of many journal articles in the field of psychiatry. No malpractice cases, no criminal charges; just the stigma of admitting to a prior treatment for a mental illness over 5 years ago.
Dr. Philip J Leonard  - NEVER place a bottle of lidocaine or keep a cell phone in your pants pocket. Info at www.philipleonard.com and www.thankyoudrleonard.com
Transcripts from TSMBE Temporary Suspension Hearing
Dr. Pat Herrera - An Alabama physician receives an inquiry on his prescriptions for pain killers from an insurance company, at the same time that two teenagers (who had no relationship to Dr Herrera) die of an overdose. A media feeding frenzy results. The state board shows it's muscle by revoking Herrera's license. A judge has demanded reinstatement...but the board has not given up. Currently he has his license but can't write prescriptions!
Dr. Lorraine Martinez - a temporary hospital suspension escalates out of control for a New Mexico obstetrician/gynecologist.
Lydia Grotti, MD- 8/22/2003 Temporary Win! (Follow Link for story)
 Details of her case the fight continues
Laura Crafton, MD - Dr Crafton was Shammed Peer Reviewed when she had a contract dispute with the Hospital. Laura was particularly well loved as she ministered to the spiritual needs of her patients as well. Dr Crafton has never been sued for malpractice in her entire long career!! Dr Crafton's name is included in the National Practitioner Data Bank and can no longer practice Medicine. Think Laura is a "Bad Doc"? Please read on...
Robert Weitzel, MD, Psychiatrist - Utah pain physician charged with murder;
When he asked, Dr. Weitzel was told he was being investigated because he was "a psychiatrist prescribing opiates".
Dr James Thompson -  HCA whistleblower
Annelle Blanchard, MD, Peer Reviewed To Death !! 
Dr Ron Virmani - a OB-GYN claims he faced racial discrimination in the peer review process and can't have access to 20 years of peer review records to prove his case.
Clive Sinoff M.D -  an oncologist in Cleveland, Ohio. Even now, Dr. Sinoff is wading through the mine field of "peer review."
Roland Chalifoux,MD, - Dallas Texas, Neurosurgeon Featured in Due Process or Personal Assassination - more info in the Members only section
Robert J. Sinaiko, M.D - under investigation and prosecution by the California Medical Board, primarily because they challenge his right to engage in decisions about care grounded in clinical experience, academic research and framed by a thorough informed consent procedure. At the heart of their complaint was his use of the allergy treatment approach now widely preferred in England, Enzyme Potentiated Desensitization (EPD). While safer, more effective, more efficient and ultimately more economical, the Medical Board challenged my right as an allergist to have access to this treatment. 
Dr David Odom - Fairbanks, Alaska anesthesiologist- won in the courts in April but the hospital continues to fight back...( complaints began when he started to form a free-standing outpatient surgical center.)
Dr Lawrence Bailey
Dr Nancy Lynn Rogers - Louisiana neurosurgeon feels like she's caught in a Dukes of Hazard episode- unfortunately it's real!
Dr. Margaret Nordell
Dr.Carl Bernofsky -  Tulane's discrimination, defamation, and retaliation Against Jewish Professor of Medicine Asserted in wrongful termination and subsequent lawsuits
Dr. Sundar Nilavar - My only crime was being very vocal advocate of quality issues in patient care and refuse to dance to the tune of Admn. I told them orally & in writing that I will try to do the best I can to my patients (as if they are my family) without regard to interest of Hosp Admn or HMOs or any other bottom line oriented pencil pushers!
Dr. Martin Goldman -Jackson County Circuit Judge John Moran found that the hospital denied due process to Dr. Martin Goldman, the head of Truman's radiology department, when it sought to remove him in December 1997.
Bahram Zamanian, M.D - cardiologist in New Orleans, LA. Note the discussion of bad faith peer review and the law in the legal opinion from the circuit court of appeals.
John Minarcik, MD - a Florida pathologist who was jumped on by a large hospital chain. Even though the courts backed him, the hospital just won't quit!
David A. Shaller, M.D. contested his dismissal from the Veterans Administration after he protested substandard care of patients on ventilators by persons untrained in same.
Dr. Stephen W. Smith, US Army - Stephen Smith took on the entire Army. And even though he "won" they continue to take potshots. For detailed info visit his website.
Tai-Min Chen MD - Suspension; Fort Wayne, IN April 27, 2000
P.V. Patel, MD - Midland, Texas cardiologist
Dr Patton
Dr Conner (California) -Conner was denied reappointment to Salina following a peer review panel recommended against the reappointment. The district court said it was private and there were no federal grounds
Pankaj Desai, MD - New York plastic surgeon decided to expand his practice; competition went into attack mode
More Tales of bad faith or "sham" peer review - growing list...EPIDEMIC
"Peer Review Can Be Deadly"

New sub-committees are being formed:

  • OB - GYN's - most common peer reviewed
  • General Surgery -  2nd most common peer reviewed
  • Pain Specialists and Pain Clinics -  Pain Issues

if you are interested in joining any of these, email your interest to info@peerreview.org

Members ONLY 

Access OUR Resources- Network with Fellow Victims of Sham Peer Review

To Join, Please contact info@PeerReview.org 

The FIRST  thing to do when Sham Peer Reviewed,
Summary Suspended or
when you get a Letter from your State Medical Board

 Health Links Select Site

THE CENTER FOR PEER REVIEW JUSTICE

Center for Peer Review Justice
1000 West Esplanade, Suite 102-149
Kenner, LA  70065

CPRJ Board of Medical Advisors
CPRJ Board of Legal Advisors

Email:  Info@PeerReview.org
Legal:  LEGAL@PeerReview.org
Public Relations: PR@peerreview.org

504-621-1670 phone - 24/7 HOTLINE

Peer Review Solutions
www.PeerReviewSolutions.org
Richard's articles, "thank you" notes and testimonials are
included in our newest website.
Hit Counter

CPRJ

Want Your own Website?

* Disclaimer