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

[Brett Snodgrass]

You are completely insane, malicious and a disgrace to the medical profession.

“Of course, of course.” Lying to the State medical board about not causing an unnecessary neck dissection, while under oath during an April 2014 deposition is surely “not” perjury.

Also, it’s definitely “good” to buy a book, have another resident ask me if I bought it and then register the book using my name and email address. Surely it’s also “honorable” to write that a resident broke their desk when the desk was just fine. Would you like photos of the desk that I allegedly broke?

Would you like photos of the saw that I allegedly broke? The Stryker bone cutting saw was not broken, but after being used for months, the replaceable blade of the saw broke while cutting bone. It’s probably “not” malicious to write that I broke the saw, because the disposable blade, and the saw are quite similar.

Writing that I broke a saw in my educational file without discussing it with me is probably an effort to help me accomplish the remediation.

It’s probably also “good” to spread rumors around the residency program, including to other attendings that a resident broke into the program directors home. That probably “won’t” generate any prejudicial assessments.

It’s probably also “equitable” to write a letter to a resident’s file that berates them for answering accurately on a College of American Patholgists proficiency survey. Eric F. Glassy, MD, has written that the answer given is the correct term for the AML M3 cell with many auer rods.

Writing that a resident is somewhat impaired while grossing, adding it to their file, and saying nothing to the resident about it is “ethical.”

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Brett Snodgrass]

I don’t condone my actions, but writing it was malicious is not accurate. Did you know that the program director repeatedly refused to talk with me about the content that she wrote in my file?

I’m busy earning CME, and impulsive insults from anonymous users with incomplete information does not appear to add much educational content to the forum.

 

[Brett Snodgrass]

The Honorable Commissioner considered all the information available to her and ruled equitably. She asked many questions, and even wrote that my effort to care for patients was admirable.

It would behoove a physician to exercise such a judicious mindset regardless of whether they are reviewing their peers or reviewing the medical literature.

 

[path or no path]

The Honorable Commissioner considered all the information available to her and ruled equitably. She asked many questions, and even wrote that my effort to care for patients was admirable.

It would behoove a physician to exercise such a judicious mindset regardless of whether they are reviewing their peers or reviewing the medical literature.

This has got to be a fake account.

 

[Gastrapathy]

60/40

OTOH, folks always ask what it takes not to match as an AMG.

 

[gutonc]

This thread has gone sufficiently off topic (assuming it ever was on topic), that it needs to be closed.

 

[NotAProgDirector]

Looking at all the documentation of the case, it appears there's plenty of blame for both sides.

The program was somewhat sloppy with their remediation and/or probation plans and documentation. If they did in fact refuse to meet with Brett, or not give him the feedback that he needed, that's unfortunate. In situations like this, programs often use every single "issue" as evidence of your poor behavior, since once it's in the legal realm they want to prove their point. Whether the saw blade just broke (which happens), or you misused the saw and broke the blade, is a matter of interpretation / debate -- and I'm not an expert that can assess who is correct.

Dragging issues of poor care into this discussion is not helpful. Whether the neck dissection was correct or not has nothing to do with this issue, and you should have left it out of the discussion.

But the bigger issue from my (relatively) unbiased view is your behavior and response. It appears you had serious problems in your Prelim Surgery year, and then similar problems in your path residency. It's unfortunate, as I expect you're actually quite smart and good at what you put your attention to. I expect your ability to read path slides, interpret biopsies, etc, was quite good. What appears to be lacking is communication skills with others. As a PD, this is a really hard problem to address. I'm sure each of these actions described in the legal documents seemed like a good idea at the time, but they are poor choices.

As mentioned, I hope you can get help and get your life and career back on track. Perhaps this is a mental health issue you need to address, or more likely I'm concerned that this is a high functioning Asperger's situation. Whatever label gets used, you need help to get this under control or it will continue to haunt you.