from youarewithinthenorms.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., 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., M.B.A., 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., IN THE SPIRIT OF LEROY BAYLOR, JAY K. JOSHI MD., MBA, AISHA GARDNER, 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
National Practitioner Data Bank is a failed, unconstitutional system that functions as a professional blacklist for physicians, Pharmacists, dentists, Nurses and all
This article by Dr. Richard Willner presents a scathing critique of the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB), characterizing it as a failed federal experiment that functions as a modern-day blacklist for physicians. They argue that the National Practitioner Data Bank is a failed, unconstitutional system that functions as a professional blacklist for physicians.
According to the author, private corporations are granted the authority to submit defamatory reports with complete legal immunity, often resulting in the permanent unemployment of skilled doctors. This process is criticized for lacking due process, as there is no meaningful federal oversight to verify data accuracy or provide a fair appeals mechanism. The document claims that a single entry can trigger a multiplier effect, spreading across various licensing boards and ending careers without constitutional protections.
Most significantly and importantly, Richard Willner et al. call for the abolition of the agency, comparing its damaging social impact to the political blacklists of the mid-20th century.
Center for Peer Review Justice
New Orleans, LA
Email: info@PeerReviewjustice.org
By: Dr Richard B. Willner
The National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) is a 40-year experiment created by an act of Congress, along with the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (HCQIA). The experiment has failed. It is time to abolish this agency. The NPDB is a black list reminiscent of the McCarthy blacklist of the 50s. Instead of targeting the Red Menace or Communists, the target of this blacklist was the White Menace: “Bad Doctors.”
The problem is that too many good doctors’ names are submitted to this list. And it is disturbingly easy to do. The perception is that if a doctor is included on this list, they must be a bad doctor; otherwise, why are they on the list?
The consequences of a listing are dire. As a result of a listing in this “data bank”, many doctors become unemployed and unemployable. For surgeons who must use a hospital Operating Room, the “data bank” is a permanent as a tattoo.
Clearly, a doctor has a “liberty interest” in his professional career and reputation. Also, plenty of hard work goes into becoming a doctor. A listing by this agency irreparably damages a doctor’s career and his reputation. A listing thus leads to a loss of liberty. Yet in the United States of America, we have this document called the Constitution.
Delegating Federal Power to a Private Corporation and deprivation of liberty without due process
So, in examining the National Practitioner Data Bank, are doctors being deprived of liberty without due process of law?
When Congress created the NPDB, it created a highly unique agency. This is the only federal agency that has delegated publication power to corporations, corporations that have been granted the authority to publish whatever they please on federal stationery.
Not only does the federal government allow them to publish, but it also assists with the distribution of the publication and grants them immunity for what they publish. These publishers, private corporations, have thus been released from the confines of libel law. They can publish whatever they please without fear of reprisal, and the federal government protects them behind a veil of immunity. This means that the victims of defamation by said corporations have no recourse against those corporations for various and sundry torts, including defamation.
Consider the scenario where an entry is made to the NPDB that is simply flat-out defamation. I estimate that the entire process takes less than one hour.
What recourse does the doctor have to combat this?
In the real world, in the event of defamation, the doctor could sue for defamation to recover any resulting damages. When a defamatory statement is laundered through the NPDB, there is no recourse. Any lawsuits will be dismissed under the veil-of-immunity defense.
THE 40 YEARS OF FAILURE OF THE NATIONAL PRACTITIONER DATA BANK
In the real world, in the event of defamation, the doctor could sue for defamation to recover any resulting damages. When a defamatory statement is laundered through the NPDB, there is no recourse. Any lawsuits will be dismissed under the veil-of-immunity defense. The doctor can then proceed with a time-consuming and arduous formal “secretarial review” to obtain redress. That is assuming he, or his lawyer, has heard of this. Chances are, he/she has not. One doctor fought a defamatory listing for eight years before someone informed him of the secretarial review option. He had never heard of it. No lawyer advised him of it.
And the “secretarial review” option is not a de novo review of the facts of the case. The NPDB does not do that. In fact, no agency does. The chances of prevailing are remote. The NPDB is designed as the “roach motel” of medicine. Statements can be entered freely and rarely come out.
In addition to the release of liability for defamation. Congress also released these private corporations from the fear of an antitrust suit. But it is only reasonable that by granting such immunity, the federal government must assume responsibility for the wrongful action of these private corporations, and not let the victims of a wrongful publication be denied the equal protection of the law. And isn’t such protection also part of our Constitution?
Upon submission, these corporate publications are distributed on federal letterhead. There is no federal government scrutiny to verify the accuracy of these corporate publications. There is no oversight. They publish and thus endorse what is mailed to them in a government publication originating from Washington, DC.
There are very serious consequences to a data bank entry. If the doctor loses his job, he loses his liberty. Is there any guarantee that this loss of liberty is accompanied by the requisite “due process of law” that is guaranteed by the US Constitution?
DATA GARBAGE
The publications are distributed widely. First, they are sent to the doctor’s employer, his licensing board, any secondary licensing agency, their certification board and every hospital he works at or will work at in the future. The item is then sent to the DEA, the agency that issues the prescription powers. With each publication, the doctor is inevitably subjected to a new “adverse action” which generates secondary “adverse action reports”. Other states in which he is licensed will issue their own investigation and still another Data Bank. This is the multiplier effect, where one entry becomes 5 entries. Clearly, there is a double jeopardy issue here.
And then there is a due process issue. If a hospital is publishing so called “data”, how exactly was such “data” arrived at?
The reference to a data bank entry as “data” would suggest some sort of mathematical accuracy to the publication.
Yet who guarantees its accuracy? Does false information become data upon typing it into a computerized “data bank”?
There is no federal government scrutiny to verify the accuracy of these corporate publications. There is no oversight. They publish and thus endorse what is mailed to them in a government publication originating from Washington, DC, and the “secretarial review” option is not a de novo review of the facts of the case. The NPDB does not do that. In fact, no agency does. The chances of prevailing are remote. The NPDB is designed as the “roach motel” of medicine. Statements can be entered freely and rarely come out.
When it comes to computer data entry, garbage in equals garbage out.
There are very serious consequences to a data bank entry. If the doctor loses his job, he loses his liberty.
Is there any guarantee that this loss of liberty is accompanied by the requisite “due process of law” that is guaranteed by the US Constitution?
The answer to this question is a resounding no.. Congress did not mandate that these hospitals comply with Constitutional due process standards before they submit what amounts to corporate verdicts of corporate trials. As such, a trial, no appeal is allowed, no discovery is allowed, and no confrontation is mandated.
That is bad for all of us. It creates a conflict for providers, who may be caught between their own expert clinical judgment about a patient’s needs and the demands of a surveillance system they are compelled to use. This shifts the locus of medical authority from the provider’s professional judgment to the algorithm’s opaque and unsubstantiated output.
NPDB IS A FAILED EXPERIMENT!!!
Congress can only do what they are authorized to do. All congressional authority comes from the Constitution. The Constitution guarantees the right to constitutional due process before a man is deprived of his liberty. A listing leads to a loss of liberty, yet there is no guarantee of due process.
And that is where Congress failed. They failed to abide by the supreme law of the land. Congress created an agency that is in fundamental violation of the rules they are obligated to follow. Thus, the NPDB must fail, as the McCarthy blacklist failed, lest we all lose more good doctors.
🔥🔥🔥
EVIDENCE ON FIRE
ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE
DONATE THIS HOLY DAY SEASON TO MAINTAINING THIS BLOG. YOU ARE WITHIN THE NORMS FIGHT FOR PAIN CARE JUSTICE TO ZELLE 3135103378
OR TO CASH APP:$docnorm
BE SURE TO DONATE TO THE MARK IBSEN GOFUNDME DEFENSE FUND, WHERE THE SON ALWAYS RISES!!!
“..one day you will make a difference..”
FOR NOW, YOU ARE WITHIN
THE NORMS
REFERENCES:
The Anand-Clement Rule and Predictive Justice Systems
Executive
PART-1
PART-2
unbedsidemanner:
railroading of Dr. Neil Anand, md
