REPORTED BY
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. C.T. VIVIAN, JELANI ZIMBABWE CLEMENT, BS., MBA., IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HON. PATRICE LUMUMBA, IN THE SPIRIT OF ERLIN CLEMENT SR., WALTER F. WRENN III., MD., JULIE KILLINGWORTH, LESLY POMPY MD., NANCY SEEFELDT, IN THE SPIRIT OF FELEX BRIZUELA, DO., WILLIE GUINYARD BS., JOSEPH WEBSTER MD., MBA, BEVERLY C. PRINCE MD., FACS., NEIL ARNAND, MD., RICHARD KAUL, MD., IN THE SPIRIT OF 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
“..PDMPS HAVE NOT SHOWN THEY’VE REDUCED OVERDOSE DEATHS NOR IMPROVED PATIENT OUTCOMES“
SUMMARY
“Criminalizing Care: The War on Doctors and Patients”
Multiple medical professionals critique the U.S. government’s approach to opioid prescribing, arguing that the “War on Drugs” framework leads to the unjust criminalization of doctors.
They contend that prosecutors prioritize quantity over patient needs, using arbitrary metrics and misleading language to secure convictions, resulting in asset forfeiture, license revocation, and imprisonment of healthcare providers.
The authors highlight the lack of scientific basis for many of the charges, emphasizing the devastating impact on both practitioners and patients.
Ultimately, the sources call for reform of the Controlled Substances Act and an end to what they perceive as government overreach and prosecutorial misconduct.
Click Below: Listen to the Analysis and Discussion
THE CRIMINALIZATION OF YOUR MEDICAL PRESCRIPTION A CASE OF MASSIVE GOVERNMENT OVERREACH
Over the last several years the DOJ/DEA have introduced language to criminalize the practice of medicine that has become a case of massive government overreach and intrusion.
The criminalization of procedures lies and fabrication in the laws within the “war on drugs” along with medicare/Medicaid 3rd party insurance reimbursement which allows every medical clinician to be viewed as an opportunity to be criminalized (chickenshit).
Medical practitioners are often easy targets for enforcement and profitable prosecution, and are what is known in law as substantial forfeiture prizes, or career builders.
Thus, it is becoming increasingly clear that when filling out any consent form requirement issued by a physician, dentist, or pharmacist, one must also be advised of one’s Miranda rights.
WHY SUBSTANTIAL FORFEITURES ARE PROFITABLE PROSECUTION
Let say a private business person such as a physician has a private pension plan for retirement. Such a person can put in a tax-deferred pension plan of about $30K every year.
With the growth of the stock market and the earned interest from dividends on their stock, that money can accumulate to millions of dollars over 30 years for a business person. (1.5 million dollars)
One Sizes fits All
When a physician, pharmacist, or dentist is raided and charged with drug trafficking or money laundering within a healthcare practice, their assets (property) are subject to forfeiture. Prosecutors know they can easily seize these assets, and without hesitation, they go after these prizes.
A medical license is considered property or another prize, becoming part of the seizures, and this process occurs without a hearing.
The practitioner’s ability to earn an income is stripped immediately.
The prosecution and DEA police use these techniques to humiliate the medical practitioners.
The once-proud medical practitioners now find themselves, victims of the “War on Drugs” classified as drug traffickers dressed in white coats, pill mills. These are the one-size-fits-all languages used as the operating prosecutorial propaganda.
Dr. Helen Borel points out in her book, American Agony, The Opioid War Against Patients in Pain:
“Thus, the majority of healthcare professionals mostly MDs, targeted by the DOJ, will spend time in jail or on house arrest, without having done anything wrong…
..Too, they will also lose their professional licenses, and by DOJ Gestapo-style seizures, will forfeit all their personal and professional assets, and their patients’ medical charts.”
where figures lie and liars figure
However, all the medications prescribed and/or dispensed are legally obtained by the medical practitioner under the authority of their licensing requirements. These medications are prescribed for therapeutic use for the specific treatment of individuals’ diseases and disease states.
The prosecution cases however are always based on data of solely numbers, complicated by unscientific non-FDA approve algorithms, where figures are allowed to lie and are liars, are allowed to figure.
Voided in the entire prosecutorial misconduct are the diseases and disease states of the patients, such as sickle cell, sarcoidosis, chronic intractable pain, radiographs, blood work, physical examination performed over the years the practices have been in business.
“…DEA prosecution cases are always based on numbers..”
The DEA has gotten away from its original purpose
Walter Wrenn MD, writes:
” The DOJ/DEA is familiar with this process and uses it to incriminate physicians.
A physician is trained to conduct a history and physical examination on a patient. The physician is taught to believe the historical narrative of the patient. They are not trained to question the validity of the information given to them by the patient.
The undercover agents sent to physician offices have been trained and given information and language to use to achieve their goal of getting the physician to prescribe controlled medications. Doctors are vulnerable to undercover agents trained to manipulate them into prescribing controlled substances, leading to accusations of illegitimate prescribing practices.
At trial, this same agent testifies that they didn’t have the medical condition that required a controlled medication for treatment. This statement leads to the charge that the medications prescribed by the physician were not for a professional purpose and not for legitimate medical reasons.
a) Why?
Because the CSA gives the physician the right to prescribe controlled medications as long as it is for a professional purpose and a legitimate medical reason.
Opiate pain medications can become addictive regardless of dose. Another term and charge are that the prescriber prescribed a highly addictive medication.
How is highly addiction determined?
It hasn’t been but the term is still used. Addiction to opiate pain medications is not dose-dependent.
Another common theme heard at trial is that the physician overprescribed.
b) What does that mean and how is that determined?
The physician saw and examined the patients.
c) How can anyone other than the examining physician determine what the patients need?
They made a diagnosis and prescribed medications they determined the patients needed. All of these terms have been invented by the DOJ/DEA.
d) Why?
I believe that once they realized that the war on drugs was a total failure that they got in a room and determined that the only way to save their jobs was to invent a new drug dealer.
That new drug dealer invented by the DOJ/DEA was the physician.
THE CLASSIC PROSECUTORIAL PROPAGANDA TALKING POINTS ARE HEARD EVERYWHERE AND IN EVERY CHARGE
“How can we sustain our jobs? They then invented the terms overprescribing, highly addictive, and not for professional purposes or legitimate medical reasons.
They then created the concept of all healthcare professionals as drug dealers, so now we frequently hear the terms “drug dealers with white coats.”
Criminalizing Care: The War on Drugs and Medical Practice
Felix Brizuela writes:
” The problem I have always seen with the controlled substance that, it is a classic case of bureaucrats, trying to be scientists based on little to no knowledge just based on speculation to set rules, that cause harm. We further had another example of judges using public nuisance ordinances, leading to great harm.
The fact is that the scheduling of drugs is based on their addiction potential. The only main difference between drugs of potential abuse and drugs of non-potential abuse is what they call supplies.
Heroin is in and out of your system quickly, it has a massive potent effect, causing but some describes euphoria, some describes the feeling of calm.
Because it’s in your system and out of your system rapidly, to prevent withdrawal people must medicate frequently which is what makes it such a potentially dangerous drug since frequent dosing, without physician supervision can lead to death.
When it comes to other drugs, fentanyl, hydrocodone, oxycodone, oxymorphone, etc, there’s no evidence that anyone drug is more addictive than the other. They all have a different half-life, there is no proof of the difference in potency therefore scheduling drugs from 2:00 to 5:00 is more prejudiced than it is reality.
This gives the federal government more ammunition. Anything that’s scheduled too, is considered like heroin. This gives prosecutors, with no scientific knowledge more ammunition. They rescheduled drugs all the time.
THE DEA HAS GIVEN THE ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY TO PROMOTE MEDICAL DISCRIMINATION AND HUMILIATION: THE CASE OF WALGREEN’S PHARMACIST BARTOW FLORIDA
So therefore, I agree that we must do away with the controlled substance act because quite frankly, it makes no sense, it just leads to unlawful prosecution.
Not to mention the devastating impact is having on the health well-being and lives of the public.”
CONGRESS HAS FAILED TO CLEAN UP THIS MESS
“..remember nemesis is the mother of all karma..remember..”
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
THE NORMS
REFERENCES:
FAQ: The Criminalization of Medical Prescriptions
1. What is the main issue being discussed in these sources?
The sources describe the increasing criminalization of medical practitioners, particularly in the context of prescribing controlled substances like opioids. The authors argue that the DEA and DOJ, under the guise of the “War on Drugs,” have implemented overly aggressive tactics, leading to the unjust prosecution and humiliation of medical professionals. They assert that the focus on numerical data and the use of terms like “overprescribing” and “highly addictive” without proper scientific backing have resulted in an environment where medical practitioners are presumed guilty until proven innocent.
2. How are medical practitioners being targeted and penalized?
The DEA and DOJ utilize tactics such as raids on medical practices, asset forfeiture, and revocation of medical licenses. These actions are often taken based on accusations of drug trafficking and money laundering, which the authors argue are misapplied to legitimate medical practice. Prosecutors focus on the sheer volume of controlled substances prescribed without considering the individual patient needs, medical diagnoses, or the therapeutic intent behind the prescriptions. This leads to significant financial losses, reputational damage, and the inability to practice medicine for the accused practitioners.
3. What is the role of “substantial forfeiture” in these cases?
Substantial forfeiture allows law enforcement to seize assets, including property and financial holdings, of individuals suspected of crimes. The authors claim that prosecutors target medical professionals, knowing they often possess significant assets accumulated over their careers. These assets become “prizes” for law enforcement, incentivizing aggressive prosecutions even in cases where the evidence of wrongdoing is weak.
4. How is the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) being misused, according to the sources?
The CSA grants physicians the right to prescribe controlled substances for legitimate medical purposes. However, the authors argue that the DEA and DOJ have twisted the interpretation of the CSA to target practitioners based on arbitrary metrics like the number of prescriptions written. The lack of clear guidelines and the use of vague terms like “overprescribing” allow for subjective judgment and prosecutorial overreach, undermining the original intent of the CSA.
5. What are the consequences of this criminalization for patients?
The authors highlight that patients are ultimately the ones who suffer the most. The fear of prosecution leads to doctors being hesitant to prescribe necessary pain medications, even for legitimate medical conditions. This results in patients experiencing untreated pain, diminished quality of life, and potential harm due to inadequate medical care.
6. What is the proposed solution to this issue?
The sources call for a reevaluation and potential overhaul of the Controlled Substances Act. They advocate for a shift in focus from the quantity of prescriptions to the quality of patient care and the legitimacy of medical need. The authors urge Congress to intervene and address the injustices being perpetrated upon medical practitioners and their patients.
7. How does the case of Walgreens pharmacist in Bartow, Florida illustrate the problem?
The case, although not detailed in the provided text, likely serves as an example of how the current system empowers individuals to discriminate against patients based on their prescribed medications. This highlights the stigmatization faced by patients who rely on controlled substances for pain management and the ripple effect of the overly aggressive approach to drug enforcement.
8. What is the significance of the statement “nemesis is the mother of all karma”?
This statement, found at the end of the provided text, suggests a belief that the injustices committed against medical professionals will ultimately result in negative consequences for those responsible. It underscores the authors’ conviction that the current system is fundamentally flawed and unsustainable, and that there will be a reckoning for the harm caused by the misapplication of drug laws.
- PREDICTING DRUG DIVERSION: CATHLEEN LONDON MD
