Listed on NPDB.. future in medicine ruined?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Throwaway15906

New Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I began a residency program last year but took a LOA shortly after starting with support of my PD for personal issues. During my LOA, I was arrested for a related reason (charged but not convicted, then expunged) and voluntarily reported the incident to the state medical board, at recommendation of my attorney, even though it didn’t fall in any category for mandatory reporting.

Even though I was already on LOA to address the issues, my RTL was inactivated temporarily while the medical board investigated the incident and they decided not to take any further actions. I had no idea it was reported to the NPDB until today when I randomly decided to do a search. Being that the issue never interfered with work in any way, wasn’t mandatory to report, and I voluntarily took time off to address this problem, it never occurred to me that it was something that would ever show up there.

During my LOA, I voluntarily decided to resign from my residency program and take the next year to work on myself and get my personal life in order, with plans to re-apply this year. I have done exactly that and finally feel prepared and ready to focus on continuing my medical education.

After the realization today though, I feel devastated. Will being listed on the NPDB prevent me from being accepted to any residency programs? Will it affect my employment opportunities even after residency?

When the charge was expunged, I thought I could finally move on with my life. Is there anyway to have it removed? Or is my future in medicine permanently hindered by this?

If someone is able to offer any guidance or insight, it would be tremendously appreciated. Feeling incredibly discouraged.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Is anyone able to say whether or not the NPDB is routinely checked for residency applicants? Or whether it is possible to have these listings removed for certain cases, like one that has been expunged?
 
There is a question on ERAS that asks (more or less) "Is there anything in your record that may impact your ability to be licensed?". Something like this would necessitate you saying "yes" to that question and explaining the situation. Trying to hide it from residency applications is a good way to get yourself in big(ger) trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Is anyone able to say whether or not the NPDB is routinely checked for residency applicants? Or whether it is possible to have these listings removed for certain cases, like one that has been expunged?
I pretty easily found this: The NPDB - Check Your Report FAQs

IF you decide to respond to the report, PLEASE have it reviewed by your attorney. Do not just "wing it".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Your much bigger concern about getting re-admitted into residency is the fact that you flaked out of one residency already by taking a LOA and subsequently resigning, so why should residencies take a risk on you when you have red flags and there are other applicants that don't have that? You don't have to respond to this - just have a really good answer to the statement above for 1) your personal statement and 2) interview day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
There is a question on ERAS that asks (more or less) "Is there anything in your record that may impact your ability to be licensed?". Something like this would necessitate you saying "yes" to that question and explaining the situation. Trying to hide it from residency applications is a good way to get yourself in big(ger) trouble.

I do not remember this question on ERAS. You know what doctor, what you need to be doing is talking about what we need to do as a community of providers to stop this medical board madness. These medical boards are out of control and while you think you will never be affected, you are only one of the LUCKY ones, trust me. There are many physicians who are good doctors and students and residents who have done nothing wrong, but have been severely harmed by these medical boards. Families are destroyed and people are killing themselves. Why? Because no one is doing anything about it. People like you, unaffected cannot even imagine what it is like. Your mind doesn't even want to go there because its too horrible of a thought. It happens to other people, not you, right? The people who realize what is going on are so badly harmed by it that they cannot fight for their rights. The only people who can help are the people who benefit from the circumstance, lawyers who often take money and do nothing. We need to band together and fight for our rights as physicians, together against this legal system that is killing us!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
How do you know that this person "flaked out"? You know nothing about that. I take it from your handle you are on the other side.....We will see wont we?.... This is a war of our times and there is a battle in our profession..... good versus evil...... you are on the wrong side......you are probably a mediocre male doctor from a well to do family of doctors and that is why you have this attitude about LOA. Just because someone took a LOA and then resigned doesn't mean that person "flaked"!

I don't know what axe you have to grind, but the OP resigned from a residency program. Now they want another residency program to hire them. What stops them from voluntarily resigning from the second program?

flake out Slang
1. To renege, as on a social engagement: Sorry for flaking out on you last night—I had to work late.
2. To lose interest or nerve: I toyed with the idea of getting a tattoo but flaked out when I saw the needle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
There are many physicians who are good doctors and students and residents who have done nothing wrong, but have been severely harmed by these medical boards.

These blanket statements are easy to make, but say nothing. Do you have any proof? I personally have not seen anybody that was sanctioned by our Medical Board that didn't deserve it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I don't know what axe you have to grind, but the OP resigned from a residency program. Now they want another residency program to hire them. What stops them from voluntarily resigning from the second program?

flake out Slang
1. To renege, as on a social engagement: Sorry for flaking out on you last night—I had to work late.
2. To lose interest or nerve: I toyed with the idea of getting a tattoo but flaked out when I saw the needle.

Yes, however there is definitely a negative connotation to your usage and even the definition you have provided. OP's post suggests to me that the LOA and subsequent arrest related to the personal issues in the LOA, likely relate to some health issue (I consider substance use disorders to be health issues).

True, we don't know that. Just as we don't know that they "flaked." When you reflect on what someone has for certain invested in even being a physician and being a residency program, it's not difficult to imagine that there's a great deal of emotional pain for the OP in all of this, regardless of "fault" or language.

Without knowing more, and given the pain the OP most certainly is in because of all this, I think it's fair to use more diplomatic language than "flake out."

I've seen aPD address the fact that not completing one residency causes another residency program to consider what risk might still exist for their own program, in almost the exact language I have just used.

Most residents that take LOAs and resign for personal reasons, well, that's not termination, and most of the residents in the former category are not "flakes" and most come to SDN in an excruciating amount of pain. It's not our job to try to look out for the residency programs on here, is it? I thought we were here to try to provide support to those pursuing health care careers.

If I have a patient, or a freaking stranger on a bus tell me this sort of tale of woe regarding their job, I just wouldn't use the word "flaked" out of sensitivity, unless I was trying to be mean. There are other words in the human language.

Words matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
These blanket statements are easy to make, but say nothing. Do you have any proof? I personally have not seen anybody that was sanctioned by our Medical Board that didn't deserve it.
Doximity articles on the topic are illustrative, where you see comments - there are plenty of articles, and hundreds of comments, even to one article. Plenty of real life stories made by physicians with both faces and names attached to their Doximity accounts and their stories, accounts which are verified to some extent - at the least to the extent SDN physician accts are. Of course their stories are stories, but they exist from real physicians real names real faces, you could probably contact directly, and you can read the stories and decide if there's enough proof to think unfair treatment has ever happened from a board to a doc.

People who think there is no quality of witch hunt from the board to physicians with health issues, likely have either just not experienced it themselves or dealt with enough people who have. It's also something that physicians often hide.

In my own state, more than one physician who has experience treating other physicians, have had dealings with the medical board and have plenty of such stories. They felt the need to shelter their patients from the medical board just because of what they experienced - and experienced first hand but not directed at them personally. So perhaps biased but not self-servingly so.

I also know that the medical board actually employs not medical professionals, but ex-cops and private investigators, to do the investigating. So you won't believe me when I say that physicians in those circumstances can be treated more like potential criminals than professionals with illness. I also witnessed the medical board use such investigators and violate the LAW in pursuing their investigation - I know this was law-breaking because an attorney familiar with the medical board and its abuses gave them the smack down on that front.

So then we can say whatever we like on our opinion, but I hope that we can all agree that whatever is the LAW, is what the medical board is in fact obligated to follow, and that failures to follow the law in dealing with physicians over whom they have almost unilateral power over their licenses - well, that's disappointing and unfair at best. And I'm here FIRST HAND to tell you the medical board FAILED to follow the LAW as per not my understanding, but that of a LAWYER who was not providing second hand opinion on it, but handling the case personally. The medical board backed down on that front, so apparently they weren't going to push that they were not in fact on the wrong side of that.

I'm not saying every resident that ever took an LOA, resigned, was terminated, or physician investigated/sanctioned was treated unfairly.

But if you think there are not abuses in the system, you are fooling yourself, because it's not reality and it doesn't take much digging to see that it's otherwise in some cases.

So it's rare, great. So is leprosy and I just had to review it for boards, so I guess I'm supposed to care even about uncommon suffering. It's not the frequency of harm that should make us care. I don't care that physician abuse may be uncommon - I care anyway. It's devastating on a level that we lose truly good and talented human beings from the profession, to despair or suicide, and even one is one too many.

TLDR
I guess it depends on what your level of evidence you're looking for. If you want accounts with names, faces, details, attached, you can find them. Contact physicians and attorneys you may find credible, that specialize in treating or representing other physicians, and they can inform you as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Doximity articles on the topic are illustrative

Bunch of articles and comments on the internet don't exactly convince me much. Besides, all you hear is one side of the story. Kind of like the multiple "unfair" dismissals from residency programs, that turn out to be legit once you see both sides of the story, and not just the "wronged" resident's side.

People who think there is no quality of witch hunt from the board to physicians with health issues...

There is no witch hunt at all, but there is concern that health issues might impact patient care. Would you like a schizophrenic doctor to operate on your wife? I'm sure if the doctor was treated it would be fine, but the medical board is there to protect the patient, not the doctor. If they feel a mental health issue is a hindrance, you can bet there will be sanctions ("witch hunt" if you want to call it that).

In my own state, more than one physician who has experience treating other physicians, have had dealings with the medical board and have plenty of such stories. They felt the need to shelter their patients from the medical board...

If those physicians are sheltering their patients from the medical board, they're unethical and likely breaking the law. Would you like your wife to be operated on by a schizophrenic doctor that needs treatment, but not getting treatment because his physician is "sheltering" him from the medical board?

Would you shelter from the medical board your partner who's an alcoholic? At least in Ohio, if you know it and don't report it, you're just as liable (and yes, you WILL likely lose your medical license for not reporting it).

I also know that the medical board actually employs not medical professionals, but ex-cops and private investigators, to do the investigating.

Thank goodness for that! I wouldn't want a physician doing investigations, any more than I want a detective to do surgery. Investigation is their skill. However, once the evidence is collected, a physician needs to go over it to determine if there's validity to the complaint (typically expert witness physicians).

but I hope that we can all agree that whatever is the LAW, is what the medical board is in fact obligated to follow, and that failures to follow the law in dealing with physicians over whom they have almost unilateral power over their licenses...

So after all your arguments and complaining, you say this, which basically is the whole point for the existence of medical boards. To uphold the law and protect patients from physicians who should not be practicing medicine.

You're wrong, however, that medical boards have "almost" unilateral power. They absolutely have unilateral power. They give you the license, they can take it away if you break the rules. Trying to rally physicians to revolt against medical boards is like rallying drivers to revolt against the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Driving is a privilege, not a right. The BMV gave you the privilege to drive by granting you a license, and they have unilateral power to take that license away. Likewise with the state medical board. Practicing medicine is a privilege, not a right.

Having the state medical board grant you a license to practice medicine and then you revolting against the medical board makes absolutely no sense...unless you don't want to practice medicine anymore.

But if you think there are not abuses in the system, you are fooling yourself, because it's not reality and it doesn't take much digging to see that it's otherwise in some cases.

Of course there are abuses in the system, but you make it sound like most physicians get screwed and we must revolt. "We need to band together and fight for our rights as physicians, together against this legal system that is killing us!" - Practicing medicine IS NOT A RIGHT. It's a privilege. If you don't believe me, ask the medical board that granted you your license, they'll be more than glad to remind you.

Personally I don't know of a single case that didn't deserve to be sanctioned by the medical board in Ohio, not a single one. I'm sure there are out there, but in Ohio they're as rare as leprosy...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Yes, however there is definitely a negative connotation to your usage and even the definition you have provided. OP's post suggests to me that the LOA and subsequent arrest related to the personal issues in the LOA, likely relate to some health issue (I consider substance use disorders to be health issues).

True, we don't know that. Just as we don't know that they "flaked." When you reflect on what someone has for certain invested in even being a physician and being a residency program, it's not difficult to imagine that there's a great deal of emotional pain for the OP in all of this, regardless of "fault" or language.

Without knowing more, and given the pain the OP most certainly is in because of all this, I think it's fair to use more diplomatic language than "flake out."

I've seen aPD address the fact that not completing one residency causes another residency program to consider what risk might still exist for their own program, in almost the exact language I have just used.

Most residents that take LOAs and resign for personal reasons, well, that's not termination, and most of the residents in the former category are not "flakes" and most come to SDN in an excruciating amount of pain. It's not our job to try to look out for the residency programs on here, is it? I thought we were here to try to provide support to those pursuing health care careers.

If I have a patient, or a freaking stranger on a bus tell me this sort of tale of woe regarding their job, I just wouldn't use the word "flaked" out of sensitivity, unless I was trying to be mean. There are other words in the human language.

Words matter.

The bolded is exactly the point I am making. I'm sorry that you and another user are offended at the use of the words 'flake out'. I re-word my statement to:
Your much bigger concern about getting re-admitted into residency is the fact that you resigned from one residency already by taking a LOA and subsequently resigning, so why should residencies take a risk on you when you have red flags and there are other applicants that don't have that? You don't have to respond to this - just have a really good answer to the statement above for 1) your personal statement and 2) interview day.

Hopefully that is acceptable to all users' sensitivities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
The bolded is exactly the point I am making. I'm sorry that you and another user are offended at the use of the words 'flake out'. I re-word my statement to:
Your much bigger concern about getting re-admitted into residency is the fact that you resigned from one residency already by taking a LOA and subsequently resigning, so why should residencies take a risk on you when you have red flags and there are other applicants that don't have that? You don't have to respond to this - just have a really good answer to the statement above for 1) your personal statement and 2) interview day.

Hopefully that is acceptable to all users' sensitivities.
This is quite nice. I do really appreciate that you gave the OP constructive and practical advice about what needs to be addressed to help their career moving forward.
 
Bunch of articles and comments on the internet don't exactly convince me much. Besides, all you hear is one side of the story. Kind of like the multiple "unfair" dismissals from residency programs, that turn out to be legit once you see both sides of the story, and not just the "wronged" resident's side.

Yes, this is why I suggested that using the starting point of people who are willing to put their real life names and faces to a professional forum, might be a place to start. Many invite people to discuss with them privately their experiences, and some of them have things they would share supporting their side of the story. Expecting a court of law level of evidence outside of court is unreasonable. Neither do I suggest taking anything at face value. I also suggested talking to people who have first hand experience with the medical board that are not necessarily the ones in hot water. I also suggested talking to people face to face even. I'm assuming as a physician you often take patient report of abuse at face value, I don't know why this would never apply to a fellow physician. But people believe what they want. If you're not willing to seek out more information from direct sources, it seems equally ridiculous to dismiss them out of hand as it is to just believe them.

You're either involved in medical board dealings, or you're not. If you're on the outside, it's easy to assume all is well.

There is no witch hunt at all, but there is concern that health issues might impact patient care. Would you like a schizophrenic doctor to operate on your wife? I'm sure if the doctor was treated it would be fine, but the medical board is there to protect the patient, not the doctor. If they feel a mental health issue is a hindrance, you can bet there will be sanctions ("witch hunt" if you want to call it that).

You are trying to prove a negative. I have suggested ways to investigate that witch hunts occur. Just because you don't think there is one, doesn't mean there isn't one. Nor did I ever suggest that medical boards trying to protect patients or even having sanctions on mentally ill docs is a witch hunt. What I mean to say, is that some mentally ill doctors are subjected to unnecessary and unfair practices by the medical board and the profession, that in some cases amounts to a witch hunt. The example I gave, where a medical board VIOLATED LAW to go after a physician - to me I would put that in witch hunt territory. If breaking the law to go after someone doesn't qualify as a witch hunt, I'm not sure what does.

If those physicians are sheltering their patients from the medical board, they're unethical and likely breaking the law. Would you like your wife to be operated on by a schizophrenic doctor that needs treatment, but not getting treatment because his physician is "sheltering" him from the medical board?

Physicians have a duty to report other physicians who are impaired to practice medicine, to the medical board, even breaking doctor/patient confidentiality that would otherwise apply. Where did I state that such physicians were violating their ethical duty to report by "sheltering," or that they should? I understand that you misunderstood.

An example of "sheltering" would be when a medical board contacts a medical provider without either a subpoena or a release of health information from the physician/patient, to gain confidential medical information, and the provider doesn't break the law and confidentiality to provide it. Besides duty to report impairment, if the provider does not believe or have evidence there is impairment, guess what? They don't have to answer those questions, but believe me, the board will demand answers they have no legal right to, and put pressure on. If you don't believe me, there's plenty of attorneys who specialize in board dealings that can share their experience on that front. Why do you think those law offices exist?

Other ways a provider might "shelter" someone from the medical board, would relate to how documentation is done - but nowhere do I suggest that a provider ever do documentation that is not 100% honest, accurate for providing the best medical care, or that would hide a patient's danger to self or others.

If one doesn't think that it's possible to look at someone's medical record and see evidence of a provider's bias for/against, or where a 3rd party could twist what's there to a jury or medical board, I wonder about reading comprehension. Providers who are adept in how documentation is perceived when it exits the medical sphere and enters the legal one, know that this absolutely can be the case, and documentation in that case is not just a matter of what is medically accurate or necessary, but also how it conforms to law. Which I've been told more than once by many qualified individuals during my time in healthcare, that physicians are often woefully ignorant of that side of things. That's the basis of a lot of malpractice cases, and it's one place that physicians who are ever subpoenaed and testify in court, will see how what they say is twisted. That's the "art" of documenting from a medicolegal perspective. None of this has to do with being unethical, breaking the law, hiding impairment, or being dishonest. If you don't think there's latitude within all of this for how you write your notes, I suggest you consult an attorney who specializes in medical documentation to help school you on this aspect of practice.

Physicians that one way or the other, see their note burn people in ways that are NOT in keeping with their objective evaluation of a situation, learn to document differently.

Would you shelter from the medical board your partner who's an alcoholic? At least in Ohio, if you know it and don't report it, you're just as liable (and yes, you WILL likely lose your medical license for not reporting it).

No, of course not. That's ridiculous and not at all what I suggested, but it seems like you think I did. So the answer is no, that is not what I mean by sheltering, and no, I do not suggest doing anything illegal or shirking any ethical duties, or acting in any way that endangers a patient. Although it's been pointed out to me by those that specialize in treating fellow physicians, that you also consider how what you do endangers your own patient, the physician. Your list of considerations and ethical duties don't diminish, they increase. You must be fair to all involved, and careful in both your judgement and documentation.

Thank goodness for that! I wouldn't want a physician doing investigations, any more than I want a detective to do surgery. Investigation is their skill. However, once the evidence is collected, a physician needs to go over it to determine if there's validity to the complaint (typically expert witness physicians).

The point isn't that you have someone who is skilled at investigation investigating, that's great. The point is that when you are using people who are used to enforcing the law to catch criminals, you risk treating physicians being investigated, as criminals. You seriously think that only the upside applies here? There are attorneys in numerous positions that would say otherwise. I'm not even talking defense attorneys. Prosecutors can tell you the issues they have in investigations when police or other investigators are not impartial.

So after all your arguments and complaining, you say this, which basically is the whole point for the existence of medical boards. To uphold the law and protect patients from physicians who should not be practicing medicine.

I never said I had an issue with the existence and purpose of medical boards. Here's a question. Do you think medical boards do a perfect job of protecting the public from physicians who should not be practicing? I'm going to assume the answer is no. So why assume they do a perfect of job when it comes to sanctioning physicians? It makes zero sense. Yes, they only lack sensitivity, not specificity (they only miss bad docs, they are never unfair to others).

You're wrong, however, that medical boards have "almost" unilateral power. They absolutely have unilateral power. They give you the license, they can take it away if you break the rules. Trying to rally physicians to revolt against medical boards is like rallying drivers to revolt against the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Driving is a privilege, not a right. The BMV gave you the privilege to drive by granting you a license, and they have unilateral power to take that license away. Likewise with the state medical board. Practicing medicine is a privilege, not a right.

I said almost, because there are in fact very rare cases where the medical board has been challenged on legal grounds, and either faced consequences or had some of their decisions reviewed or overturned. The medical board itself has not legal power beyond what is written in the legislature of a given state. It is also subject to law, and that law is subject to change. As is the policy that many medical boards create, if the law gives them latitude to create that policy. It's interesting reading in the states where finding that law is not too difficult to find.

Having the state medical board grant you a license to practice medicine and then you revolting against the medical board makes absolutely no sense...unless you don't want to practice medicine anymore.

Yep. And nowhere did I suggest a revolt against the medical board. I think you're actually confusing me with the poster to whom you replied earlier, when I quoted your response to them. I'm making it clear to people that the medical board has a lot of power. I'm the first person on this board to say the system is unfair, but then people don't hear the direct follow up with is being the first person to say keep your head down and avoid trouble at all costs. The closest I come to making waves, is in an anonymous internet forum telling people that they actually should fear the medical board, not only because they're powerful, but because just as with our justice system (and the medical board is an extension of that) justice is not always served. Don't get arrested, even if you're innocent.

Of course there are abuses in the system, but you make it sound like most physicians get screwed and we must revolt. "We need to band together and fight for our rights as physicians, together against this legal system that is killing us!" - Practicing medicine IS NOT A RIGHT. It's a privilege. If you don't believe me, ask the medical board that granted you your license, they'll be more than glad to remind you.

Yep, you got me confused with someone else. I'm also one of the first on here to say that having a license is a privilege - and I don't mean privilege like "oh aren't you so well behaved!" I mean privilege like you're not entitled to it, and it can be taken away from you at any time. The assumption by so many is that it's so hard to lose your license. Funny how it's mostly licensed docs telling you that. There's a contingent that HAVE lost their license, that will tell you having one is indeed a privilege, some will say it was lost more easily than they otherwise expected.

Personally I don't know of a single case that didn't deserve to be sanctioned by the medical board in Ohio, not a single one. I'm sure there are out there, but in Ohio they're as rare as leprosy...

Congratulations for living in Ohio. We often say "the board" but the truth is each state is its own kingdom in its own way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
So much drama over such an innocuous term... I'd be really interested on knowing if OP was as hurt/insulted by such an offensive verbal micro-aggression. I've always thought as a rule of thumb, you can't be more offended than the "victim".
With that being said, whatever term you use to describe what the OP had to do, he needs to be as upfront about this on his PS and interview, preferably including all the steps you took to remedy your issues. It wouldn't hurt to reach out to your original program if you left in good terms, your future employer will most likely attempt to speak with them. Whatever happens, best of luck, I commend you on being pro-active about your mental health.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I do not remember this question on ERAS. You know what doctor, what you need to be doing is talking about what we need to do as a community of providers to stop this medical board madness. These medical boards are out of control and while you think you will never be affected, you are only one of the LUCKY ones, trust me. There are many physicians who are good doctors and students and residents who have done nothing wrong, but have been severely harmed by these medical boards. Families are destroyed and people are killing themselves. Why? Because no one is doing anything about it. People like you, unaffected cannot even imagine what it is like. Your mind doesn't even want to go there because its too horrible of a thought. It happens to other people, not you, right? The people who realize what is going on are so badly harmed by it that they cannot fight for their rights. The only people who can help are the people who benefit from the circumstance, lawyers who often take money and do nothing. We need to band together and fight for our rights as physicians, together against this legal system that is killing us!
It doesn't matter if you remember the question or not. That question is absolutely on ERAS.

There are bad actors within medicine and there has to be some kind of system to identify them. The boards are imperfect, but they are what they are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I’ll say this: I’m much more appalled by what doctors manage to get away with than with a overzealous boards. Sometimes I’ve wondered what exactly a doctor needs to do to lose their privilege.

I know of doctors that have sexually assaulted patients during a pelvic exam, and that in court confessed that they just “couldn’t help themselves” have their license reinstated and are back at work.

The president of the Georgia medical board once said that they have to balance public health and the issues of health care providers. It’s easy to find a doctor in Atlanta but there are town that are 50-75 miles away from the nearest doctor.

As usual, it is complicated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Okay. so I looked online and according to the NPDB, they cannot remove or modify a report that has been submitted to them. The only way for a report to be removed is for your state's medical board (who presumably reported you in the first place) to remove it. The NPDB recommends contacting the reporting entity first. But if that fails, there is a dispute process:

The NPDB - How to Dispute a Report

Once you do so, the reporting entity has 60 days to respond. If this issue isn't resolved, there is a dispute resolution process. In this case, I assume you would not be contesting the accuracy of the report, but rather whether it was in accordance with reporting requirements. The fact that the board didn't sanction you does't necessarily mean it shouldn't be reported. Without knowing the details of your case, we can only speculate, so perhaps this is worth contacting a lawyer about.

Good luck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
I don't know what axe you have to grind, but the OP resigned from a residency program. Now they want another residency program to hire them. What stops them from voluntarily resigning from the second program?

flake out Slang
1. To renege, as on a social engagement: Sorry for flaking out on you last night—I had to work late.
2. To lose interest or nerve: I toyed with the idea of getting a tattoo but flaked out when I saw the needle.

I'm sorry about the tone of my response and my personal attack. Please forgive me. I dont know you and perhaps I should give you the benefit of the doubt that you know not what you say. You see, people can have serious reasons for resigning and especially those who are at higher risk for socioeconomic problems and or health issues. Also a resident could resign due to severe bullying in the program. The people at higher risk of these issues are those from lower income families, females, older residents, people with children, minorities and etc.. People ar higher risk of being bullied are those who are different for any number of reasons including actually being a high level performer. I hardly believe that anyone who graduated from med school would "flake" at this point in their career. I suppose it is possible that someone just loses interest and doesn't want to be a doctor, and I do know one person like this, but in that case there would be no further attempt to get into another residency. Sometimes people need a fresh start due to circumstances which were out of control at that time and if just given that opportunity they would flourish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
These blanket statements are easy to make, but say nothing. Do you have any proof? I personally have not seen anybody that was sanctioned by our Medical Board that didn't deserve it.

Yes, I have a great deal of proof. The problem is that what you think you know is only what the board wants you to know. You dont know the whole story. These boards are corrupt and if you dont believe it well that's part of the problem. Until it happens to you, you are not aware of the level of corruption. Physicians who find themselves in this position are shocked. Listen, you know about the prison industrial complex right? You are aware that our legal and justice system imprisons innocent people on a regular basis by forcing plea bargains, false confessions and distorting evidence, withholding evidence and basically working with law enforcement to frame people?
When in prison the system uses solitary confinement which causes brain damage....
I'm assuming you are aware of these problems. Why would you then believe that a medical board which works in conjunction with the same department of justice's which imprison innocent folks then behaves in a fair way when dealing with doctors? The truth is that doctors have even fewer rights than those accused of crimes. The supreme court ruled years ago that certain due process rights of doctors who are accused could be denied bc the need to expedite the process and remove "dangerous" doctors was more important than the individual right of the doctor. The boards have since then run amok by violating due process in mor than just certain ways...they violate due process in multiple ways. Hearsay for example can be used against a doctor.
So, yes I have lots of proof. Its vast. It's too much to post here. You can do some research for ypurself..I know what is true.
And by the way, board actions are not suppose to be punitive but are suppose to make the doctor a better doctor. This is an inherent logical flaw because all board actions are punitive and do not make the doctor "better" any more than simply bringing the issue to light and allowing the physician to learn from it. I am not referring to crimes of course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top