This can't be right. You don't go jail for popping on a command urinanalysis.....You might go to NJP, you might lose your privileges, but jail (and for 7 months??)..no way.http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/military/article64660642.html
Holy sh$t. Anyone know Maj Eric Smith? Is this story remotely accurate?!?
I didn't mean to, I was being tongue-in-cheek.Pretty unfair to suggest someone you don't know is a narcotics distributor without any evidence to support that.
I hate to burst your bubble, but this story probably has little to do with military medicine. Most medical corps officers wouldn't know how to bust your rear, to get you a 7-month jail sentence, if their lives depended on it. It's too much admin for them, too much legal. It's easier to ADSEP you.Just another one of the 50 reasons not to join (or leave at the first possible opportunity) the s$&@show that is military medicine. I thought the "war on drugs" was over and shown over and over and over again not to work.
What. A. Joke.
It would take a lot of explaining and possibly some remediation to practice again. But it wouldn't be the first medical career the Army destroyed for questionable reasons.I doubt they will retry as all new evidence, and that not allowed in for administrative failures by his Army TD attorney, could be brought to a second trial. The contamination of the urine sample with more than one DNA and possibly the chest hair sample are examples.
They are likely building an administrative case to prevent paying his retirement. Is his medical career over not having practiced clinical medicine since July 2011?
Do you have any evidence of this?The drug testing lab at Tripler had has some major breaches in protocol recently and some unethical behavior on the part of the leadership. I think this is being swept under the rug in true Army fashion. I don't think the Army wants to deal with having to potentially void thousands of positive samples and deal with the repercussion of possible mistake prosecutions. For those of you who find it hard to believe that one can be prosecuted and jailed for one positive UA understand if you don't accept the NJP, the Army will go out of it's way to crush you.
I am aware of one case of someone post appendectomy coming down with another infection years later at the "stump". Could have been a very poorly done appendectomy, or maybe just crazy random bad lucIt talks about 3 emergent appendectomies that he had. I thought an appendectomy was something that a person only had once. Am I missing something?
Overall this case sounds awful.
Seminole Fan 3 - I had an emergent appendectomy at MAMC on 9 Aug 2011. I was asked by the surgical attending that night, if I would let her intern do the surgery, and I naively said, "of course, I support medical eduction and all of us have to learn how to do this." On 11 Aug 2011 I returned to the MAMC ER after almost passing out while driving and was told I was fine and was shamed and berated for my concerns. My health never improved for several months, but I was always struggling whether to seek care or not after the way I had been treated in the MAMC ER. On Jan 25, 2012 something popped in my abdomen before going to bed and I nearly lost conscioussness before calling 911. I was found in the home and taken to St. Clare Hospital where it was discovered that I had a retained stump. The first words out of the surgeons mouth were "who the hell did your appendectomy in August?" He then proceeded to say, "I did what I could, but you have the most inflamed colon I have ever seen and everything needs to calm down first." In June 2012 I represented to St. Clare Hospital emergently again. This time, I knew I had appendicitis again. The surgeon spent two hours in a laparoscopic procedure to definitively remove it. The appendix on the third appendectomy measured 1.75 x 3.5 cm. No one at Madigan acknowledged the suffering I endured prior to the diagnosis (I was sick for several months prior to Aug 2011, with what I assume was chronic appendicits) or after the botched surgery in a way that I felt was authentic and meaningful. They did hold an M and M conference, after I brought this up at my credentials hearing in 2013. The peer review comittee, evidently, was unaware of all this and appeared slightly embarrased, but still uninclined to consider that my medical issues should be factored into my abrupt, isolated and temporary changes in performance. Moreover, law precludes a patient from learning of the results from an M and M conference. So, all I know is they had one.It talks about 3 emergent appendectomies that he had. I thought an appendectomy was something that a person only had once. Am I missing something?
Overall this case sounds awful.