YOUAREWITHININTHENORMS.COM
NORMAN J CLEMENT RPH., DDS, NORMAN L. CLEMENT PHARM-TECH, MALACHI F. MACKANDAL PHARMD, BELINDA BROWN-PARKER, IN THE SPIRIT OF JOSEPH SOLVO ESQ., INC.T. SPIRIT OF REV. IN THE SPIRIT OF WALTER R. CLEMENT BS., MS, MBA. HARVEY JENKINS MD, PH.D., IN THE SPIRIT OF C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., EVELYN J. CLEMENT, WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGSWORTH, RENEE BLARE, RPH, DR. TERENCE SASAKI, MD LESLY POMPY MD., CHRISTOPHER RUSSO, MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, ADRIENNE EDMUNDSON, ESTER HYATT PH.D., WALTER L. SMITH BS., IN THE SPIRIT OF BRAHM FISHER ESQ., MICHELE ALEXANDER MD., CUDJOE WILDING BS, MARTIN NJOKU, BS., RPH., IN THE SPIRIT OF DEBRA LYNN SHEPHERD, BERES E. MUSCHETT, STRATEGIC ADVISORS
“knowingly or intentionally” acted in an unauthorized manner. Seems simple enough,
Ah, Justice Breyer. His farewell decision in Xiulu Ruan v. United States was hailed as a triumph for a reason in an era of madness, giving doctors the breathing room to, you know, actually practice medicine without constantly fearing the government’s pitchforks. A unanimous 9-0 decision, mind you!
Even Justice Thomas couldn’t find a way to disagree, and that’s saying something.
Yet, here we are, with the Sixth Circuit discarding Breyer’s careful reasoning like an outdated medical chart no longer relevant to their diagnosis of justice.
Thank you, Dr Clement, for TIRELESSLY documenting the state-sanctioned pain patient torture and mass murder program and the program to incarcerate any doctor who does not go along with the agenda to stop prescribing any opioid to any person, for any reason at all, EVER! These monsters have got to be STOPPED!
In Ruan, Justice Breyer generously offered the government a little reminder: If you’re going to convict a doctor of over-prescribing medication under 21 U.S.C. § 841, you need to prove that they “knowingly or intentionally” acted in an unauthorized manner. Seems simple enough, right?
You know, prove that the doctor actually meant to break the law. Oh, and you can’t just put the doctor on trial for failing to be a “reasonable” doctor, as if there’s some ideal, perfectly cautious physician floating around like Goldilocks prescribing exactly the right amount of Oxycontin to exactly the right people at all times.
But the Sixth Circuit had other ideas. Forget Breyer’s emphasis on subjective intent. They’re more interested in good ol’ circumstantial evidence.
Yes, because nothing says justice, like piling up vague hints and red flags to convict someone, especially when it’s a doctor trying to balance the chaos of human suffering.
DISASTROUS AND CALLOUS Sixth Circuit RULING IN U.S. VS DR. DAVID SUETHOLZ RE-EnablES IGNORANTS AND THE JUNK Science OF PAIN CARE MEDICATION TREATMENT
THE egregious sin: “putting his patients first.”
In a world where doctors are supposed to care about their patients, Dr. David Suetholz is guilty of committing the most egregious sin: putting his patients first.
His heartfelt defense that he was “treating his patients in the best way he knew how” and that there was no evidence of “nefarious” motives on his part seems to have fallen on deaf ears in the courtroom.
Linda Cheeks
“The government’s War on Drugs, like its War on Poverty and its War on Terror, is a failure. It has clogged the judicial system, unnecessarily swelled prison populations, fostered violence, corrupted law enforcement, eroded civil liberties, and destroyed financial privacy.
It has encouraged illegal searches and seizures, ruined countless lives, wasted hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, hindered legitimate pain treatment, and had no impact on the use or availability of most drugs in the United States.”
According to the Sixth Circuit, compassion and good faith don’t count for much when you dare to deviate from bureaucratically approved prescribing norms.
Dr. Suetholz’s argument was simple: He knew his patients, he understood their pain, and he made decisions based on their needs—not some checklist cooked up by faceless regulators. He didn’t set out to harm anyone.
He wasn’t running a pill mill or profiteering from prescriptions. He “cared about his patients with every fiber of his being” and believed, in his professional judgment, that he was prescribing medication to help them genuinely.
But no, that’s not good enough anymore because subjective intent—the heart and soul of doctor-patient trust—apparently doesn’t matter.
Instead, the court waved off his defense, reducing his years of medical practice to a game of “gotcha” with circumstantial evidence.
The prosecution and the judges seem to think that he was somehow criminally negligent just because Dr. Suetholz didn’t follow every procedural formality.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t a case of someone who ignored his patients. Dr. Suetholz prescribed medications that were well within his medical purview.
But now, doctors like him are held to rigid “objective criteria” that dictate the “legitimate medical purpose” and the “usual course” of practice. In other words, if you’re not prescribing exactly what’s on the insurance company playbook, you’re guilty of malpractice—or worse, a federal crime.
But what about the nuances of patient care? According to the court, Dr. Suetholz’s subjective belief that he was helping his patients didn’t matter.
They cite the Moore case, suggesting that “bad-apple” doctors can’t hide behind their personal judgment or good intentions. Bad apples? Really? Since when did caring too much become synonymous with being a bad doctor?
Wby Faith
There are so many lies; Dea are not Drs. Those ppl are not disabled and need pain medical care. Drs are not doing anything. Dea is, in my opinion, just like those ppl who took Emmitt Till. They don’t care and will do what they want. Stay out of healthcare. How can you determine medical treatment when you are not the Dr? Please get rid of the Dea.
Dr. Suetholz didn’t hide behind anything—he treated his patients the best way he knew how. Yet here we are, with his sincere efforts being reframed as criminal behavior because they didn’t perfectly align with the Government’s unenumerated “objective” standards.
What’s worse is the court’s dismissal of his argument that he had no “nefarious” motives. The fact is, no one showed any evidence that Dr. Suetholz was out for personal gain, acting recklessly or even deviating from the norm in bad faith. His patients had serious conditions—chronic pain, anxiety, panic attacks.
Eva
The one true thing he said is “that’s what it is all about, makin’ money”.
He responded to their needs as any compassionate doctor would. And what did he get in return? A conviction that brands him a criminal for caring.
If we’re now convicting doctors for using their judgment and prescribing with the best of intentions, what does that say about the future of patient care?
THE WHITEHOUSE PILL MILL 2017-2019
Are doctors supposed to treat patients by following rigid algorithms devoid of human empathy and individual decision-making? Dr. Suetholz’s case is a chilling reminder that the government seems to want robots, not doctors, who unquestioningly follow “accepted limits” rather than listen to their patients.
So here we are, punishing good doctors for their excellent faith. If caring deeply about your patients is a new crime, the medical profession better brace for a long line of criminal indictments. Take Dr. Suetholz, for example.
He was convicted of, among other things, prescribing the “strongest pill size you can get in Oxycontin” (I mean, cue the ominous music, right?).
Sure, he prescribed 80-milligram Oxycontin pills to a patient in obvious need.
And let’s not forget the Sixth Circuit practically gasped at the sheer horror of Dr. Suetholz increasing a patient’s benzodiazepine prescription from a mere 15 pills to a jaw-dropping 120.
Sure, the patient had generalized anxiety and was suffering from panic attacks, but in this enlightened age, where anxiety magically vanishes with a couple of mindfulness exercises and chamomile tea, who needs such a “shocking” dose of medication?
Kimberly
I know the area. It’s full of hard-working, blue-collar people. Many are farmers, and others are “hard on the body” professions. Dr Parker’s patient population is made up of these people. And the worst drug abuse in Arkansas comes from meth. I don’t know anyone who is prescribed pain medication in this state. It’s all a bunch of propaganda.
the audacity to prescribe benzodiazepines
Dr. Suetholz had the audacity to prescribe benzodiazepines for panic attacks, an unheard-of practice in medicine (sarcasm intended). Not only that but when the patient’s urine test came back negative for the prescribed meds—possibly indicating that they weren’t even taking them properly—Dr. Suetholz still didn’t cut off the prescriptions immediately.
This meant to the Federal Court that the patient was probably selling the meds on the streets. Right
Because what other explanation could there be?
The Sixth Circuit was sure Dr. Suetholz should have known.
Justice Breyer’s unanimous opinion in Ruan demanded the government prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Dr. Suetholz knew he was acting improperly—subjective intent, folks!—but the Sixth Circuit was happy to lean on circumstantial evidence instead.
Ted Cole
I really like receiving these articles. They are so full of interesting information and leave an honest rendering of people’s lives as they view them.
They cited Suetholz’s “failure to adequately examine” his patients, “failure to enforce compliance,” and overall failure to be that mythical “reasonable” doctor that Breyer warned against. In doing so, they brushed aside Breyer’s rejection of holding doctors to the standard of some hypothetical “reasonable” physician.
So, where does that leave the rest of the medical profession? Well, over 3,000 doctors have already been convicted using this kind of evidence, meaning Breyer’s thoughtful ruling is being ignored daily.
The next time you see a physician nervously tiptoeing around your symptoms like they’re walking through a minefield, remember to thank the courts for ensuring that every prescription is a potential federal indictment waiting to happen.
Because nothing says “patient care” like doctors operating with one eye on the law and the other on the DEA.
About the Author: Blue Lotus, MD
The Author received an honorable discharge from the U.S. Navy, where he utilized regional anesthesia and pain management to treat soldiers injured in combat at Walter Reed Hospital. The Author is passionate about medical research and biotechnological innovation in 3D printing, tissue engineering, and regenerative medicine.
OR SEND
TO CASH APP:$docnorm
ZELLE 3135103378
ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE
BE SURE TO DONATE TO THE MARK IBSEN GOFUNDME DEFENSE FUND, WHERE THE SON ALWAYS RISES!!!
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITIHN
THE NORMS
