OP:
I have that feeling you may have withdrawn from this thread, and hence this might be a waste of time, but I'll try anyway.
Reviewing all of the posts on this thread (and google searches), here's the timeline:
You went to medical school at UTMB, graduated, completed an internship, and started an Anesthesia residency at Hopkins. Obviously, you must have done reasonably well in medical school.
You left that residency in your CA-2 due to personal tragadies, unspecified.
You return to texas, get a medical license, and work in an ED.
You have an "incident" at that ED, and your license is revoked in 2010
In 2012 your license is restored with limitations / conditions.
In 2013 your license is permanently revoked, documentation from the board suggests you were no longer willing to abide by their conditions.
There are two theories on this thread for these facts. Both leave you in a difficult spot, but the solutions are completely different.
Theory #1: A Giant Misunderstanding
Your explanation for all of this is that it is a huge mistake. You left your residency due to something completely unrelated. You were working in this ED, and took Ambien instead of Alleve. You became confused/altered, and don't remember the details. You apparently took some medication from the ED. This was found in your home. Hence, the BoM thought you were abusing drugs. You claim this is all untrue -- and suggest that hair evidence demonstrates that you haven't used drugs. If this explanation is true, then this is a huge social catastrophe.
Problem is, multiple facts don't fit this storyline. The documentation suggests that you had a fake urine system on you, and used it to try to bypass the urine drug screen. Plus, they state that multiple empty vials of medications were found in your home. These facts make no sense in your telling of the story. The only explanation is that they were planted by the police (or someone else) to frame you -- but even that doesn't explain the fake urine situation. Hair samples are notoriously inaccurate, and don't really prove anything. And blaming 2 pills of ambien for your memory loss and bizzare behavior is highly suspect -- sure, Hollywood types do this all the time to explain why they crashed their Ferrari into a lightpost and claim they can't remember, and it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the alcohol they drank. And they get off. But we all know that this is completely bogus -- that 80+ year old patients with mild dementia can go bonkers after getting low doses of sedatives, but 10 or 20mg of ambien in a young healthy woman are very unlikely to have the same effect.
If this is the actual truth, then the solution is proving these conflicting facts false. The system has "screwed" you and now you need to prove your innocence. So much time has passed, that might be difficult.
Theory #2: You have a major substance abuse problem and are in total denial.
In this situation, you were caught using drugs at work, and stealing them also. You had a whizzinator to fake your urine, because you were worried you would get caught. Ultimately you were caught, but remain in complete denial that there was a problem. You're blaming everyone else for the situation, instead of accepting responsibility for your actions. All of the facts fit this theory, perhaps except the hair testing (which as I mentioned, is highly inaccurate).
In this case, I agree with others that you had several concerning behaviors -- you used substances illicitly, stole them from work, and tried to be deceitful when caught to cover your tracks. However, the latter two behaviors are often tied up with the first. This doesn't excuse them, but part of the pathology of substance abuse (especially in physicians) is their ability to obtain substances from work and cover their tracks well.
If this is the "truth", then the biggest problem is your continued denial. As I'm sure you have discussed at AA/NA, admitting you have a problem is the first step -- without that, there is no recovery.
We all believe Theory #2, because it's the only thing that fits the facts. Most, if not all, PD's or possible employers who review your application will also because frankly, Theory #1 is contradicted by the facts. And that's the challenge you face -- with your current explanation, no one is going to take you seriously. The saddest part of this whole story is that, despite all that has happened, you don't really see the root of the problem -- which unfortunately is a common problem with addiction.
