X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
> Frank, Ian, and all listserv members:
>
> I feel I must speak up here, and comment somewhat vigorously.
>
> I cared for terminally demented, extremely ill geropsychiatric patients at
> Davis Hospital in Layton, Utah. They received an excellent "history,
> examination, and prescribing". When their families requested (in writing -
> the advance directives are all signed) no further medical interventions, I
> gave moderate doses of opiate to them during their last days. No patient
> was overdosed. This is STANDARD MEDICAL CARE, and happens everyday in every
> city in this nation.
>
> There is more than just a "perception" of over-regulation and harassment.
> For doing exactly what I should have done, and was taught to do, I was
> charged with Murder in the deaths of the above patients.
>
> I have placed the (prosecutor-introduced into evidence, now public record)
> medical charts as well as all documentation I can find on a website for the
> world to see. Those who take the time to look there will see the truth.
> This is not just posting news items; you can't get much more complete than
> showing the charts and the trial transcripts and hearing testimony and many,
> many items from the press, editorial letters, and the opinions of experts in
> the field.
>
> I show just how prosecutors working DIRECTLY for the Utah Division of
> Professional Licensing cheated me out of a fair trial, using discredited
> experts to ruin my life.
>
> I show how prosecutors have consistently ignored ethical and legal
> principles in their pursuit not of justice, but of winning at any cost, in a
> malicious, bad faith case against me.
>
> I haven't been able to work in two and a half years. I have spent six
> months and a day in prison. If that's not harassment, I don't know what is.
>
> It really amazes me that more physicians don't see the danger this sort of
> state persecution means for all physicians and all patient care. I am here
> to tell you that it is a very real phenomenon. I think Frank Fisher
> represents the same. Bill Hurwitz evidently suffered a similar situation.
> I am heartened by the recent suggestion that medical professionals and
> concerned citizens come together to protect the wrongly accused. Sure, it
> doesn't happen to many, but when it happens to YOU it's not easily
> dismissed. When it happens to ANY of us, it contributes to the worsening of
> already poor patient care.
>
> Too often the profession silently stands by as lives of colleagues are
> trashed, piously thinking, "It would never happen to me". I thought the
> same thing, people. I gave standard care. How could they do this to me?
>
> Thank you to those of you who have examined the data I've posted. But to
> all of those who dismiss me based on just having been charged, or by what
> the lay press reports, without even looking at the facts that I have so
> laboriously posted, I say to you that your actions cause me to feel very
> sad. You are part of the problem.
>
> Robert Weitzel, MD
> raw1md@msn.com
> http://www.WeitzelCharts.com
> 325 F Street, SLC UT 84103
> 801-581-0963
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frank Adams" <melange.tx@VERIZON.NET>
> To: <PAIN_CHEM_DEP@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 6:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [PAIN_CHEM_DEP] Summary of discussions
>
>> Ian
>> First off, one cannot "abuse" an inert substance. One can only misuse it
>> and this is the more correct usage. That's part of the problem with the
>> pain field. It often can't even get the words right. There is an ancient
>> Chinese saying: Wisdom begins when we call things by their right name.
> We
>> are a long ways from wisdom by this definition.
>> Your defence of the regulators is not based on solid facts. You provide
> no
>> data, for instance, four your comment that only a few of the many
>> prescribers are harassed. And what "good case" have regulators made for
>> their continued interference with medical care for the legions of those
> who
>> suffer from intractable pain?
>> I am not sure if you pay close attention to all the information posted on
>> the list. To say, as you do, that careful history, examination and
>> prescribing will allow good patient treatment and within the law if naive.
>> Yes it will usually result in good patient treatment, but what is "within
>> the law" as many have documented here is arbitrary at best and all the
>> documentation in the world will not prevent any physician from being
>> persecuted by officialdom.
>> If the regulators on this list do not like what they read, then perhaps
> they
>> should take the advice of President Truman: If you can't stand the heat,
>> get the hell out of the kitchen."
>> Perhaps, if you allow these thoughts to pass your censorious blockade, the
>> rest of the members might like to comment.
>> frank adams, md, frcpc
>> houston, texas
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: The Project on Pain Management and Chemical Dependency
>> [mailto:PAIN_CHEM_DEP@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM]On Behalf Of Ian Buttfield
>> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 4:59 AM
>> To: PAIN_CHEM_DEP@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
>> Subject: [PAIN_CHEM_DEP] Summary of discussions
>>
>> Is List Members.
>>
>> For some time now have we have had debate about the merits or otherwise
>> of drug regulation, regulation of prescribing and investigation of
>> possible drug abuse by medical practitioners.
>>
>> The List has seen posts from medical practitioners who feel they have
>> been aggrieved by the system, from regulators doing them best to control
>> flow of illicit drugs into the illegal drug market, and from
>> investigators whose responsibility it is to try to determine where use
>> is inappropriate.
>>
>> Many of us have also had the opportunity of reading books by prominent
>> authors on the subject including David Musto who has outlined the
>> historical data behind drug regulation in the United States. The
>> situation in the rest of the world is similar where physicians perceive
>> that they are being over-regulated in some cases, and harassed in a few
>> others.
>>
>> The regulators, in my view, make a good case for continuing regulation
>> to ensure the public safety and reduce abuse of drugs of dependence.
>>
>> The investigators make a solid argument also for the role they play in
>> the process. They argue that only a few persons may be investigated and
>> only a very small percentage of prescribers are prosecuted. The
>> regulators and investigators have a view that loose statements made on
>> the List are frequently incomplete and conclusions are drawn on
>> in-adequate information.
>>
>> While there is a case for news data about prosecutions pending or in
>> process, there seems to be a view that persons who report these cases
>> have a responsibility to ensure that all the facts are presented.
>>
>> While it is clear that some physician members of the list are concerned
>> about possible prosecutions (and this does appear to interfere with
>> prescribing in some cases) there is little doubt that many others feel
>> that careful history, examination and prescribing will allow good
>> patient treatment and within the law. There is also little doubt that
>> there are cases of gross abuse by rare physicians and none of us could
>> support the types of conduct that we occasionally hear about.
>>
>> It would be helpful if any new cases could contain balanced reporting to
>> allow List members to make up their own mind about the relevance or
>> otherwise of these reports.
>>
>> Ian Buttfield
>> Moderator
>> buttfield@ozemail.com.au
>>