terminated weeks after promotion, no review, no probation, "due process" behind closed doors?!?!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ahh. I misread that. The PDF page I referenced appears to be the result that Snodgrass was arguing for -- I read it as it was the finding of the court/appeal/board.

Wrong 4 times in 2 weeks. It's time to retire.
Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Gastrapathy said:
It wasn't really a lawsuit. He appealed the board's decision and lost.

Just a smattering of cut and pasted findings of fact from the decision that I found entertaining:

"Also in September 2010, TMC transcriptionists complained about Snodgrass’ dictation because he dictated too fast, or with a fake Indian accent. They found it annoying and difficult to understand.

Snodgrass caused Lankachandra to receive thousands of e-mails from various sources, including the CDC, FDA, NIH, and usa.gov. Using her name, he subscribed to magazines and made multiple applications for mortgage loans and medical and life insurance. He contacted drug rehabilitation facilities in her name,
indicating that she was seeking treatment for drug addiction.

In May 2013, Snodgrass again became irrational due to his poor job and residency prospects. He anonymously posted two advertisements on Craigslist.org. The ads depicted an individual with a mask and what appears to be a bomb strapped to his chest. The captions are, “Looking for consultant, labor person (Meet at second floor)” and “Rice(in) inside a can, for sale (**** UMKC).” One of the ads also contained the message, “I am looking for someone to help me prepare a special lecture at UMKC- School of Medicine. Please contact me if you can help prepare this academically challenging lecture about . . . a surprise topic and medicine.”

Following the Craigslist posting, TMC and UMKC SOM increased their security measures. FBI agents interviewed Snodgrass and told him the posting could b e viewed as a bomb threat, but no criminal charges were filed against Snodgrass in connection with the postings

In March 2014, Snodgras s began using multiple Twitter accounts to send tweets to the Twitter accounts of various organizations and individuals, including the Missouri State Medical Association, the American Medical Association, Governor Jay Nixon, Senator Roy Blunt, Senator Claire McCaskill, and Dr. Jeffrey D. Carter, a member of the Board.

Examples of Snodgrass’ tweets include the following:

Dear @jeffreydcarter, if you have no idea who I blamed, why did
you write it occurred repeatedly? This is but one of many similar
examples
.
@jeffreydcarter @FTC please stop regurgitating lies, so I can
move on with my life. If continue abusing discretion I may pursue
legal recourse.

Snodgrass sent the tweets in an effort to evoke a response from the Board, in the hope of inducing it to settle this case. He tweeted from a particular Web site that allowed others to retweet his message. As a result, Carter received hundreds of tweets similar to the above examples"
Click to expand...
Mental illness is a very sad thing.
 
I'm pretty sure I read he got the license.
 
IMG_4712.PNG
 
aProgDirector said:
Ahh. I misread that. The PDF page I referenced appears to be the result that Snodgrass was arguing for -- I read it as it was the finding of the court/appeal/board.

Wrong 4 times in 2 weeks. It's time to retire.
Click to expand...

Read above. You are welcome.
 
PlutoBoy said:
Read above. You are welcome.
Click to expand...
Read the title of that document: Proposed findings of fact. At the end of a trial to a judge (as opposed to a jury) the attorneys prepare "findings of fact" which they wish the court to adopt. Each side proposes findings of fact, essentially suggesting to the court that factual issues should be resolved in that party's favor. Each party hopes the judge agrees. Then the judge picks and chooses from the two opposing sets of findings of fact, or adopts one or the other wholesale, as the ultimate findings of the court. So what you have posted is merely one side's wish list of how the case would turn out, not what actually happened.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
rabbott1971 said:
Read the title of that document: Proposed findings of fact. At the end of a trial to a judge (as opposed to a jury) the attorneys to prepare "findings of fact" which they wish the court to adopt. Each side proposes findings of fact, essentially suggesting to the court that factual issues should be resolved in that party's favor. Each party hopes the judge agrees. Then the judge picks and chooses from the two opposing sets of findings of fact, or adopts one or the other wholesale, as the ultimate findings of the court. So what you have posted is merely one side's wish list of how the case would turn out, not what actually happened.
Click to expand...

**** me I guess :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
rabbott1971 said:
Read the title of that document: Proposed findings of fact. At the end of a trial to a judge (as opposed to a jury) the attorneys to prepare "findings of fact" which they wish the court to adopt. Each side proposes findings of fact, essentially suggesting to the court that factual issues should be resolved in that party's favor. Each party hopes the judge agrees. Then the judge picks and chooses from the two opposing sets of findings of fact, or adopts one or the other wholesale, as the ultimate findings of the court. So what you have posted is merely one side's wish list of how the case would turn out, not what actually happened.
Click to expand...
Well that's... slightly bizarre. Makes the judge's work much easier, I suppose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I liked the part where Snodgrass got a 253 when the average was probably 220 and also nominated to AOA but still managed to not match. Then scrambled into some **** general surgery prelim where they thought he was so bad that they told him that he shouldn't work with patients in any clinical capacity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
154 Petitioner requests that Respondent acknowledge that respondent successfully completed the USMLE Step 2 CS Exam and that in doing so again demonstrated his competency in the foundations of clinical medicine. The USMLE Step 2 CS provides objective evidence of a physician's ability to communicate with patients and perform a history and physical. [...] In short, having taken the [CS] Exam twice and passed the communication section both times affirms Petitioner's communication competency.

155. Petitioner requests respondent acknowledge that [Dr. L] has not completed the USMLE Step 2 CS and thus there is more objective USMLE documentation that Petitioner's communications skills are effective than there is for [Dr L]'s communication skills.

:lol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
WingedOx said:
154 Petitioner requests that Respondent acknowledge that respondent successfully completed the USMLE Step 2 CS Exam and that in doing so again demonstrated his competency in the foundations of clinical medicine. The USMLE Step 2 CS provides objective evidence of a physician's ability to communicate with patients and perform a history and physical. [...] In short, having taken the [CS] Exam twice and passed the communication section both times affirms Petitioner's communication competency.

155. Petitioner requests respondent acknowledge that [Dr. L] has not completed the USMLE Step 2 CS and thus there is more objective USMLE documentation that Petitioner's communications skills are effective than there is for [Dr L]'s communication skills.

:lol:
Click to expand...

Twice?

:rofl:
 
VA Hopeful Dr said:
Meh, I failed it once. Handwriting issue. Took it again with no additional study or prep but used the computer, passed by a wide margin.
Click to expand...

I'll admit I failed because I just treated it like a series of regular office visits and missed "data gathering" or something because I didn't ask enough people coming in for a hangnail about their sexual history or whatever. I hadn't even read up on any of the study materials for it because I assumed it was going to be graded the same way as our school OSCEs. Expensive mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
WingedOx said:
I'll admit I failed because I just treated it like a series of regular office visits and missed "data gathering" or something because I didn't ask enough people coming in for a hangnail about their sexual history or whatever. I hadn't even read up on any of the study materials for it because I assumed it was going to be graded the same way as our school OSCEs. Expensive mistake.
Click to expand...

It's an expensive video game. You collect the patient information, perform the right maneuvers, state the right phrases, and rack up the points. It has nothing to do with actually practicing medicine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
So the argument was that 1) he failed an exam and therefore had the opportunity to take it twice 2) Dr L never took it since it didn't exist.

That's good stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I never washed my hands so much as I did during my theatrical performance on STEP 2 CS :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
“What’s your family medical history? Oh your father died at age 80 from a heart attach? I’m so sorry to hear that. Listen to the soft tone of my voice and look at my direct, somewhat uncomfortable eye contact displaying empathy. Ok Point earned moving on. “
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Oo Cipher oO said:
“What’s your family medical history? Oh your father died at age 80 from a heart attach? I’m so sorry to hear that. Listen to the soft tone of my voice and look at my direct, somewhat uncomfortable eye contact displaying empathy. Ok Point earned moving on. “
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I did that too :hilarious:

"That literally breaks my heart I'm so sorry..."
 
lol look at the way my heart bleeds in allo, SPF and WW threads, those SPs never stood a chance against me

I can get that "I feel your suffering" mist in my eyes on cue

I might have actually enjoyed CS, I'm that masochistic
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Gastrapathy said:
So the argument was that 1) he failed an exam and therefore had the opportunity to take it twice 2) Dr L never took it since it didn't exist.

That's good stuff.
Click to expand...
The argument was, in context, regarding communications, and that he passed a national communications test twice. She never took it, and did not have the opportunity to prove, on a national test, that she was competent at communicating.
 
Brett Snodgrass said:
The argument was, in context, regarding communications, and that he passed a national communications test twice. She never took it, and did not have the opportunity to prove, on a national test, that she was competent at communicating.
Click to expand...

This has to be a fake account right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
PlutoBoy said:
View attachment 223981
Click to expand...
Oh goodness,
Gastrapathy said:
It wasn't really a lawsuit. He appealed the board's decision and lost.

Just a smattering of cut and pasted findings of fact from the decision that I found entertaining:

"Also in September 2010, TMC transcriptionists complained about Snodgrass’ dictation because he dictated too fast, or with a fake Indian accent. They found it annoying and difficult to understand.

Snodgrass caused Lankachandra to receive thousands of e-mails from various sources, including the CDC, FDA, NIH, and usa.gov. Using her name, he subscribed to magazines and made multiple applications for mortgage loans and medical and life insurance. He contacted drug rehabilitation facilities in her name,
indicating that she was seeking treatment for drug addiction.

In May 2013, Snodgrass again became irrational due to his poor job and residency prospects. He anonymously posted two advertisements on Craigslist.org. The ads depicted an individual with a mask and what appears to be a bomb strapped to his chest. The captions are, “Looking for consultant, labor person (Meet at second floor)” and “Rice(in) inside a can, for sale (**** UMKC).” One of the ads also contained the message, “I am looking for someone to help me prepare a special lecture at UMKC- School of Medicine. Please contact me if you can help prepare this academically challenging lecture about . . . a surprise topic and medicine.”

Following the Craigslist posting, TMC and UMKC SOM increased their security measures. FBI agents interviewed Snodgrass and told him the posting could b e viewed as a bomb threat, but no criminal charges were filed against Snodgrass in connection with the postings

In March 2014, Snodgras s began using multiple Twitter accounts to send tweets to the Twitter accounts of various organizations and individuals, including the Missouri State Medical Association, the American Medical Association, Governor Jay Nixon, Senator Roy Blunt, Senator Claire McCaskill, and Dr. Jeffrey D. Carter, a member of the Board.

Examples of Snodgrass’ tweets include the following:

Dear @jeffreydcarter, if you have no idea who I blamed, why did
you write it occurred repeatedly? This is but one of many similar
examples
.
@jeffreydcarter @FTC please stop regurgitating lies, so I can
move on with my life. If continue abusing discretion I may pursue
legal recourse.

Snodgrass sent the tweets in an effort to evoke a response from the Board, in the hope of inducing it to settle this case. He tweeted from a particular Web site that allowed others to retweet his message. As a result, Carter received hundreds of tweets similar to the above examples"
Click to expand...
I was hoping the Missouri Board would stop lying, but they have no shame. Is it ethical for Physicians to lie in court? Is it ethical to lie to the Georgia Composite Medical Board and falsely inform them that Snodgrass was on probation at UMKC?

A medical board that lies, even in court, can drive good people to madness. They brought a doctor to court who committed perjury under oath by claiming that probation and remediation where the same. The DIO was asked if they were the same and she said “Oh no[sic],” one is reported to state medical boards and one isn’t. On the same day as the DIO’s deposition, the program director was asked whether Snodgrass was on remediation or probation. She looked up and away and said “they are the same.”

I have no interest in applying for a license in a state that enables perjury about academic matters as well as the care of women with breast cancer.

Would you like more examples of how the board lied about the care of women with cancer? I’ve already met with my state representative about it. However, women with breast cancer who undergo lumpectomy are no longer receiving a prolonged ischemic time and the point is largely mooted.
 
Last edited:
Please permit me to emphatically state that I do not believe that the PD is a bad pathologist. Surely her skills and knowledge are good-to-excellent.
 
Brett Snodgrass said:
The argument was, in context, regarding communications, and that he passed a national communications test twice. She never took it, and did not have the opportunity to prove, on a national test, that she was competent at communicating.
Click to expand...

Referring to yourself in the third person? Something smells bad here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
ThoracicGuy said:
Referring to yourself in the third person? Something smells bad here.
Click to expand...

It seems to be open to debate.[1]

Reference:
1. Hoogenboom BJ, Manske RC. How to write a scientific article. Int J Sports Phys
Ther. 2012 Oct;7(5):512-7. PubMed PMID: 23091783; PubMed Central PMCID:
PMC3474301.
 
In addition, writing in a third person manner that utilizes one or more proper nouns can provide the reader, at a sentence level, with more information than a sentence which only uses pronouns.
 
Last edited:
Brett Snodgrass said:
It seems to be open to debate.[1]

Reference:
1. Hoogenboom BJ, Manske RC. How to write a scientific article. Int J Sports Phys
Ther. 2012 Oct;7(5):512-7. PubMed PMID: 23091783; PubMed Central PMCID:
PMC3474301.
Click to expand...

Are you submitting your SDN posts for publication in a peer-reviewed journal? Otherwise you’re just being creepy, kinda like your sketch-as-heck story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
AdmiralChz said:
Are you submitting your SDN posts for publication in a peer-reviewed journal? Otherwise you’re just being creepy, kinda like your sketch-as-heck story.
Click to expand...

The general dislike of the use of the third person is noted. Writing in the third person is a means to dispassionately describe what was an emotionally-charged situation.

The story is thoroughly-detailed and has multiple supplemental references, with more available upon request. “Sketchy” is a questionable word to describe the story.

Using the word “creepy” is an ad hominem attack.

Good day.
 
Last edited:
Brett Snodgrass said:
The general dislike of the use of the third person is noted. Writing in the third person is a means to dispassionately describe what was an emotionally-charged situation.

The story is thoroughly-detailed and has multiple supplemental references, with more available upon request. “Sketchy” is a questionable word to describe the story.

Using the word “creepy” is an ad hominem attack.

Good day.
Click to expand...
It's not an ad hom, it's just a straight up insult.

Read more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
VA Hopeful Dr said:
It's not an ad hom, it's just a straight up insult.

Read more.
Click to expand...
Are you sure? It’s seems predicated on the story being sketchy. People perusing this forum are presumably interested in science and truth. They will probably ask for or search for additional information before jumping to conclusions or making prejudicial assumptions. The ad hominem person probably just made a false inference about the quality and quantity of documentation.
 
Last edited:
Brett Snodgrass said:
Are you sure? It’s seems predicated on the story being sketchy. People perusing this forum are presumably interested in science and truth. They will probably ask for or search for additional information before jumping to conclusions or making prejudicial assumptions. The ad hominem person probably just made a false inference about the quality and quantity of documentation.
Click to expand...
Again, not an ad hom. Just a regular insult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Let's cut out the insults on both sides, ad hom or otherwise, shall we? They serve no purpose. Else the thread shalt be locked.

Brett -- thank you for sharing all of this. Oftentimes these proceedings are performed in secrecy, and we don't get to see the inner workings. Reading the legal stuff, and your posts here, it seems you're still quite angry about the whole process. It's certainly possible that your program mishandled biopsy specimens (long bench times) and that's something that should be addressed. Your contention that they "lied on the stand" seems to revolve around the issue of remediation vs probation - which is a relatively minor issue and probably an honest mistake on their part. I hope you've been able to learn and grow through this process, as much of your behavior, even if reactionary to their perceived misbehavior, is completely unacceptable. You clearly are a smart guy -- AOA graduate and all -- and somehow your career went completely off the rails. Hopefully you can find a way to salvage all of this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
Brett Snodgrass said:
The word “try” is unclear, I mimicked her activity. For example, in December 2010, the program director wrote that “I was becoming somewhat impaired in the gross room, becoming a risk to patient care,” but she did nothing about it. She made other references in my file to suggest that I might be engaged in illegal and illicit substance activities. I had drug counseling people call her.

Another example is that the pathology program director used my social security number and had the Hospital Laboratory’s College of American Pathologist (CAP) laboratory proficiency testing bill sent to me as a formal, falsified $5,000 tax deductible receipt. I don’t have her social security number, but I sent her credit card applications using the SSN 555-55-5555. (Also, other random numbers).

She had the residency program buy an ophthalmology book, register it in my email address, and then
had a PGY1 resident come to me and ask me if I bought the book... I had a medical journal and business journals sent to her.

I regret my nonviolent and disruptive actions.
Click to expand...

You are completely insane, malicious and a disgrace to the medical profession.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

Oedipa Maas
Started licensing process in a state I will no longer be working in
Replies
7
Views
764
dozitgetchahi
D
J
Guidance Terminated from Residency PG-Y 3
Replies
23
Views
5K
Crayola227
Crayola227
M
Going back to medicine after many years of no practice
Replies
3
Views
1K
s5260205
S
CautiousLearner
Leave or get Terminated after an academic probation period? FM residency
Replies
43
Views
11K
flasheroonie
flasheroonie
IonClaws
Likelihood of medical license denial due to residency probation and contract non-renewal
Replies
44
Views
8K
VA Hopeful Dr
VA Hopeful Dr
Top