Abuse Hidden Under a Veil of Benevolence: Bill Cosby, Physician Health Programs and Cognitive Dissonance

The blue slides below are from a  presentation at the 2014 FSPHP spring meeting in Denver, Colorado and can be seen here.   The presentation was given by past FSPHP Presidents Gary Carr, MD and Warren Prendergast, MD, West Virginia PHP Director Brad Hall, MD and Montana PHP Director Mike Ramirez, MS.

This needs to be seen as a "to-do" list.

This needs to be seen as a “to-do” list.

A.A. = ASAM = FSPHP 

The quote is from Alcoholics Anonymous and the full passage is as follows:

“We are convinced that a spiritual mode of living is a most powerful health restorative. We, who have recovered from serious drinking, are miracles of mental health. But we have seen remarkable transformations in our bodies. Hardly one of our crowd now shows any mark of dissipation.
      But this does not mean that we disregard human health measures. God has abundantly supplied this world with fine doctors, psychologists, and practitioners of various kinds. Do not hesitate to take your health problems to such persons. Most of them give freely of themselves, that their fellows may enjoy sound minds and bodies. Try to remember that though God has wrought miracles among us, we should never belittle a good doctor or psychiatrist. Their services are often indispensable in treating a newcomer and in following his case afterward.”–Alcoholics Anonymous, 4th Edition,  The Family Afterward

Federation of State Physician Health Program (FSPHP) physicians often quote A.A. because they are defined by A.A. in both mechanics and mentality.  The “impaired physician” movement began with evangelical recovered addict and alcoholic physicians whose recovery was based on 12- step spirituality.  As this group molded into the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) many of them found employment at 12-step rehabilitation facilities and others joined their state Physician Health Programs and organized under the FSPHP.   Their ability to make authoritative pronouncements on physician impairment is  based on their own claim to insiders knowledge of recovery as brandished in this A.A. passage which I find condescending toward the medical profession and oddly narcissistic.

This special knowledge, of course, was based on the chronic relapsing brain disease model with lifelong abstinence and participation in 12-step recovery.

These “miracles of mental health” joined their state PHPs and those who did not agree with their rigid inflexible views were removed.   Those with access to special secret knowledge were eventually able to outvote those with intelligence and open minds as this groupthink infested and eventually monopolized  PHPs.


It is important to understand that the ideology of  A.A. is the ideology of the ASAM is the ideology of the FSPHP 

Like all “front-groups” the ASAM purports to serve one agenda while in reality serving another.  The ASAM claims to be a “physician society with a focus on addiction and its treatment” According to their website their mission is to

  • increase access to and improve the quality of addiction treatment;
  • to educate physicians (including medical and osteopathic students), other health care providers and the public;
  • to support research and prevention;
  • to promote the appropriate role of the physician in the care of patients with addiction;
  • and to establish addiction medicine as a specialty recognized by professional organizations, governments, physicians, purchasers and consumers of health care services, and the general public

In order to accomplish this the  American Board of Addiction Medicine certifies doctors  to “provide assurance to the American public that Addiction Medicine physicians have the knowledge and skills to prevent, recognize and treat addiction.”

Ostensibly these are laudable goals that are almost universally endorsed.   The perceived organizational purpose and public persona are altruistic and humanitarian.  Treating addiction not only saves individual lives but improves the community.  It is for the common good.


Abuse Hidden Under Benevolence and Torture as Treatment

History reveals that all manner of abuse can lie underneath a patina of benevolence.   In the past few months alone we have both Bill Cosby and the  British Parliamentary pedophile ring as prototypical examples.  Both cases reveal a decades long coverup of allegations in which the abusers escaped little or no investigation into their alleged crimes. Abuse of power with a large gap between the power of the abuser and the powerlessness of the abused is a common denominator.  If the abuser endorses our own beliefs systems it creates a discord that promotes disbelief.  It does not fit.   Accusations are dismissed, deflected or otherwise suppressed.   Power effectively extinguishes the truth.  Disbelieved and delegitimized, information is suppressed, charges are not filed and law enforcement and the media turn a blinkered eye for decades. Indifference, disbelief, rationalization and cognitive dissonance prevent exposure and accountability. Hidden in plain site the truth was there and easy to find.  The problem was no one was looking. Most did not want to look.

It does not take much sleuthing to uncover what is beneath the veil of the American Society of Addiction Medicine.  The history, mentality and mechanics are well documented and reveal where they came from,  how they evolved and what they have planned.    It is a complicated web and hard to explain but once the pieces of the puzzle are fit together it is clear.  But it involves assembling a complex puzzle by finding the individual pieces scattered in disparate areas including the regulatory, clinical, administrative and professional niches of the medical profession,  Alcoholics Anonymous and 12-step related organization, public policy, all levels of the political arena and other areas. Once put together the portrait is clear.

In reality the ASAM is a political action group or special interest group that is designed to cement the chronic relapsing brain disease model with lifelong abstinence and spiritual recovery as the one and only treatment for addiction.   A.A. is used as the energy source of the operation.  By labeling addiction a “disease” requiring “treatment” in which someone is helpless they are able to dictate all aspects by coercion and control.  But in my opinion the A.A. ideology is just used as a ruse to support the multi-billion dollar drug and alcohol testing, assessment and treatment industry.  The zero-tolerance mindset of the “treaters” combined with the “helplessness” of the diseased enables them to erect a revolving door of testing, assessment and treatment that provides them with both control and a steady stream of money.

IMG_0873

The FSPHP mandates 12-step ideology on all doctors in a zero-tolerance system of abuse and control while at the same time putting out misinformation that the PHP programs are the “new paradigm.”  The page below is from the book Drug-Impaired Professionals by Robert Holman Coombs.

Screen Shot 2014-12-11 at 8.06.00 PM

This is they type of propaganda these groups have propagated.   What is described above is absurd and unrealistic but it is reported, reproduced and repeated to the point that it is accepted as the truth.

The majority of physicians referred to these programs are not even addicts. These programs of Zero-tolerance and 12-step indoctrination are based on coercion and control.  They are causing many doctors to die by suicide as they are feeling hopeless, helpless and defeated.    This portrayal of a group of blissful 12-stepping doctors over the moon because they found spirituality is nonsense.

But you will not find many doctors speaking out against them for fear of “contingency management.”  Disagreeing or even questioning PHP practices including the validity of 12-step can literally cost you your license.

I have spoken to multiple physicians and nurses and have encouraged them to tell their stories here but they are afraid of retribution and “unintended consequences.”  And who can blame them?

They can send you back to one of the “PHP-approved” facilities for “stinkin thinkin.”

Unfortunately the ASAM and FSPHP have successfully bamboozled others into believing they are true experts with noble intent.  They have bamboozled the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) to the point where they have gained autonomy and unrestrained managerial prerogative.    They essentially use the state Boards to impose sanction on doctors who they report doctors for “noncompliance” which includes disagreeing with or questioning mandated A.A  or refusing to admit you have a chronic relapsing brain disease when you in fact do not.    They are in fact imposing A.A. on doctors and forcing them to accept their thinking under threat of loss of licensure.  This  violates the Establishment Clause and is a very serious problem that is being ignored.  It is a slippery slope we are on.

The FSMB House of Delegates adopted an updated Policy on Physician Impairment at their 2011 annual meeting distinguishing “impairment” and “illness”  stating that Regulatory Agencies should recognize the PHP as their expert in all matters relating to licensed professionals with “potentially impairing illness” that predates impairment often by many years.”  

It also defines “relapse without use” as “behavior without chemical use that is suggestive of impending relapse.”Screen shot 2013-05-13 at 1.30.29 PM

G. Douglas Talbott defines  “relapse without use”  as  “emotional behavioral abnormalities” that often precede relapse or “in A. A. language –stinking thinking.”

The ASAM has  monopolized addiction treatment in the United States.  But what the FSPHP arm has done is far more sinister.   A.A. has effectively taken over regulatory medicine and the private lives of doctors as a form of social control.  A doctor can be referred to a PHP for virtually anything and if the PHP believes he or she is in need of an assessment it will be done by a “PHP-approved” facility which means it will be done by a 12-step facility.  The PHP selects who will be monitored and dictates every aspect of what that entails and the entire process is done within the confines of A.A. ideology.  It is a, in fact, a  rigged game as the medical directors of the PHP approved facilities can all be seen on this list of like-minded docs who refer to theselves as “trusted servants” and “believe that evidence from extensive, well-designed studies demonstrates the great benefits of Twelve-Step recovery modalities including Twelve Step Facilitation in promoting long-term recovery.”

A.A. is imposed  on doctors through the FSPHP.  The FSPHP political apparatus exerts a monopoly of force.    And the bottom line is that A.A. has taken over all aspects of “physician health” and is forcing doctors to accept doctrine that is perhaps helpful to a few, useless or unneeded for many, and harmful and sometimes lethal to others.  This is unacceptable and it needs to be recognized.


“New Paradigm” of Zero-Tolerance and 12-step Spirituality Based on “success” of PHP to Move to Other Occupations and Kids.

To move this “new paradigm” to other populations they had to gain control of the doctors first.  They have not only created a monopoly but buffered themselves from physicians who may disagree with what they are doing to others.  This current system essentially stifles them.

The power, immunity and impunity this group yields over doctors was done silently and with no opposition. It was done by sequential public-policy steps.  This is why anyone interested in civil liberties and human rights should recognize the menace this presents to society.   The scaffold is in place and they are just adding more nooses.  Just ask the airline pilots.  They plan to impose similar systems on teachers, students and athletes.

And this is all spelled out in the ASAM White Paper on Drug Testing.   What people need to realize is what is described therein is just a few public policy steps away from them.  The only organization they have to convince is the organization that regulates any type of professional license, employment or benefit.

Gaining regulatory sway in the medical field and control over individual doctors was necessary to move this model to other populations.  It is merely a stepping stone for things to come.  It is only a few public policy steps from us to you.

This impacts us all.   It enables control of research, public policy and public health.   It is a system that suppresses dissent and shapes conformity.  The FSPHP  encourages the confidential referral of outliers.

The ASAM is pro-drug war and anti-medical marijuana.  This essentially silences most doctors for fear of being recognized and being brought in.  I know many doctors who will not even talk about it in public.

This is fixed doctrine and will not change.

That is why the ACLU and other groups who promote civil rights, those who are against the drug war and anyone involved in Medical Marijuana need to step in.    These  groups need to recognize the reality of who these people are, what they have planned and understand why they need to be stopped.   They are currently not even in the public eye and by outward appearances they appear to be benign.   In truth they are malignant and rapidly metastasizing without any symptoms.

In Order to Stop This the Following Must be Done

1) get a team of epidemiologists/statisticians to attack the “evidence-base” and “research” that the ASAM/FSPHP has used to support their claims (junk science, pseudoscience, success of 12-step, etc) and do a Cochrane type meta-analysis that will show there is little to no basis for it.

2) Demand accountability of the PHPs. Assign accountability to the Medical Societies and Departments of Public Health. Demand they be accountable for state-contractors with the Medical Boards (many of whom are complicit–in Massachusetts the Board of Registration in Medicine is simply an extension of the state PHP-i.e. Like-minds.

3) Demand that the criminal activity taking place within these PHPs be addressed by law enforcement.

4) Demand the Attorney General enforce the rampant Establishment Clause Violations occurring with mass 12-step coercion.

5) Identify and expose the  backgrounds of many of the individuals involved including felons and double felons who reinvented themselves as “addiction medicine” doctors. Many of these individuals are repeat offenders with a history of manipulating the system who should have never had their licenses returned.  In my opinion the ASAM/FSPHP/LMD rigged system is an example of corporate psychopathy.  While corporate level psychopathy is estimated at around 3% the numbers here appear to be much higher if one looks at the moral disengagement, unethical decision making, lack of empathy and externalization of blame evident in their personal histories.

6) Correctly identify that this system of institutional injustice is responsible for the astronomical suicide rate in physicians. This is due to the fact that doctors who need help are not getting it for fear of being ensnared by the state PHP and those already ensnared are being subject to coercion, abuse, institutional injustice, degradation, dehumanization, delegitimization and civil and human rights abuses and that this is a public health emergency that needs to be addressed.

7) reveal the scam set up between the PHPs, rogue labs, and “PHP-preferred” assessment and treatment gulags.

8) show how this is only a few public policy steps from Doctors to Pilots to Teachers to students to kids. etc. etc.

This necessitates that we get the conversation going before it is too late.

AA and 12-step may be the best treatment for some individuals with addiction and substance use disorders. If it works for you, then more power to  you. I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is imposing and mandating 12-step  treatment on others.

Under a dictatorship everything else becomes subordinated to the guiding philosophy of the dictatorship.   Corresponding doctrine replaces professional guidelines, standards-of-care, and evidence based medicine.  And unfortunately in the case of Addiction Medicine the guiding philosophy often trumps autonomy and ethics.

Inherent in the current chronic brain disease model of addiction is the importance of external control over individuals and political correctness and medicalization of addiction is allowing it.   Demanding scientific literacy and discriminating good from bad science would prohibit what is occurring and In order to save American Medicine the problem needs to be clearly recognized or we will become a profession that is essentially defined by the impaired physicians movement.

 

B1A19yWIMAAQf7E

 

Screen Shot 2014-11-30 at 1.37.38 PM

Physician Health Programs (PHPs) are not above the law; They just think they are

brick_wall

Physician Health Programs are not Above the Law

Are Physician Health Programs (PHPs) above the law?  

 Unable to get law enforcement to take cognizance of reported abuse, many doctors I have spoken with believe that the actors involved are impervious to criminal liability.  Complaints of fabrication and fraud involving PHPs and their affiliates to the police, the Attorney General and other law enforcement agencies have been given no credence,  tabled or dismissed with little investigation.

Believing these agencies are deliberately ignoring credible complaints and the documentary evidence placed before them, some have concluded that state PHPs have been given the power to commit crimes with impunity and immunity.

PHPs are not above the law.  It is by removing themselves from and blocking the usual routes of accountability and absolute operational control of the testing, assessment and treatment process that has enabled misconduct to remain hidden, unrecognized or excused. The crimes exist but they remain undetected, unnoticed and unpunished.

Removing Accountability

The essence of accountability is answerability which means having the obligation to answer questions regarding decisions and actions.   This requires the transmission of information when it is requested.  The accountable actor provides the information to the overseeing actors in a transparent manner.

Accountability also requires explanation and justification for the information provided. What was done and why? Standards, rules, regulations, codes, laws and other benchmarks are then applied by the overseeing actor to determine if the information provided was appropriate or inappropriate.

The availability and application of sanctions for illegal or inappropriate actions uncovered through answerability is also a necessary component of accountability. This is necessary to impose restraint on authority and power.  Lack of enforcement of sanctions contribute to the creation of a culture of impunity.

The usual mechanisms that exist to impose restraint and create incentives for appropriate behavior and actions are absent. No outside oversight exists to limit their power or subject them to a set of rules.  No regulation exists to curb abuse.

A Culture of Impunity

The authority accorded PHPs and the power they exercise exist in a culture of impunity.

The key findings of the2014  North Carolina PHP Audit are below:.

Screen Shot 2015-06-14 at 2.15.41 AM

No indications of abuse were found,  a point brandished by the PHP as redeeming  and proving no abuse was occurring. In actual fact it is an ominous finding that also relates to their apparent ability to violate the law. 

The audit found no indications of abuse but that abuse could occur and not be detected because of an absence of due process for the complainant, excessive control of the complaint process by the PHP and absence of oversight by either the medical board or medical society.  What this means is that a doctor with no power is making a complaint against an unsupervised agency with enough power to influence the investigation of a complaint against itself.  The reason no indications of abuse were found is because the system is specifically designed to hide abuse.  That is the intent.

Absence of transparency, regulation and oversight coupled with control of information enables both censorship and doctoring of records.   Strict Confidentiality is enforced by HIPAA, peer review protection, and drug and alcohol confidentiality law.  

Quest Diagnostics

PHPs are able to suppress and conceal criminal activity but they are also able to  manufacture information designed to hide misconduct.  

The North Carolina Audit found no objective selection criteria for the out of state assessment and treatment centers because none exist other than ideological mindset and monetary gain.  The same facilities are used by most state PHPS.  They are, in fact, mandated as they are the “PHP-preferred” facilities.  

In 2011 The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) issued a public policy statement on coordination between PHPs, regulatory agencies, and treatment providers. recommending only “PHP-approved” treatment centers be used and the statement specifically excludes ‘non-PHP” recognized facilities.  

What the Audit diid not discover is the medical directors of all of the “PHP-approved” facilities can all be seen on this list of Like-Minded Docs.  It is a rigged game    Every aspect of drug-testing, assessment and treatment is kept hidden and secret and within control of the PHP.

It is a rigged game in which they have removed themselves from all aspects of accountability.  They have, in effect, manufactured a culture of impunity at our expense.

 “PHP-Approved Attorneys”

My survey has revealed an additional factor stacking the deck and removing accountability from PHPs.  The attorneys ostensibly representing doctors are also part of the racket.

A doctor referred to a PHP will be given a list of 3 or 4 attorneys by the PHP who are “experienced in working with the medical board.” What they do not tell you is that theses attorneys are hand-picked or cultivated to abide by the rules dictated by the PHP.

They will not “bite the hand that feeds” and any procedural, ethical or criminal misconduct by the PHP will not be addressed.     Laboratory fraud, false diagnoses, and Establishment Clause violations are off limits.

The primary purpose of these attorneys is to enforce payment for laboratory fees and demand compliance with whatever the PHP demands.  Their primary purpose is to keep doctors powerless under the PHP and prevent misconduct, including crimes, from being discovered.

The attorney pool is currently over-served by those serving two clients and most of those outside simply do not know enough about the “physician health”  legal issues related to doctors.  When they appear before the board it is as if they are a deer in the headlights.  It is a new terrain where all due process and familiar protocol have been removed.  Of course this was all facilitated by changes in administrative and medical practice acts orchestrated by the physician health movement “in the interests of protecting the public.  This must be recognized and addressed.

Skilled negotiators and lawyers with administrative law experience would do well to consider representation for doctors before medical boards regarding “physician health” matters.

It is not that esoteric, complicated or difficult.   As with the rest of the population, most have just not critically analyzed the issues behind the curtain.

Crooked Board Attorneys

Perhaps the lowest bottom feeders  playing a role in this culture of impunity are those whose job is to ostensibly ensure that due process and fundamental fairness are followed.    It is becoming quite clear that some of the state employed attorneys within medical boards control the flow of information by picking and choosing what is before the board for consideration.    Many of these attorneys go on to represent doctors in cases before the board.   If these attorneys acted as zealous advocates on behalf of their clients they would never get a referral again and because of this the system is plugged with an attorney pool unwilling to win but simply compromise.

images-25

Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine Attorney Deb Stoller’s “Fraud Upon the Court”

Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 2.51.31 AM

Fraud Upon the Court

“Fraud Upon the court” occurs when the judicial machinery itself has been tainted, such as when an attorney, who is an officer of the court, is involved in the perpetration of a fraud or makes material misrepresentations to the court. Fraud upon the court makes void the orders and judgments of that court.

Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985 states: “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.”

It has recently become evident that the  Director of the Board of Registration in Medicine’s Physician Health and Compliance Unit, attorney Deb Stoller,  has been unethically and unlawfully withholding and concealing documentary evidence that is not only exculpatory to  me but reveals that  Physician Health Services (PHS) engaged in misconduct and fraud.   She has essentially been concealing their crimes.

The “Administrative Record” filed by the Board was absent copious documentation of major importance and all of it was submitted through the care of Ms. Stoller.  The missing documents include multiple petitions and supporting documents that are neither irrelevant nor superfluous. Each of these documents contains sufficient indicia of reliability to meet probative value.Concealing material fact, misrepresentation and making false statements to a state administrative agency is unethical. It constitutes abuse of power and fraud.

Fraud on the court occurs where a party tampers with the fair administration of justice by deceiving “the institutions set up to protect and safeguard the public” or otherwise abusing or undermining the integrity of the judicial process. Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 246 (1944).

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit skillfully defined the concept of fraud on the court in Aoude, supra at 1118, as follows: “A `fraud on the court’ occurs where it can be demonstrated, clearly and convincingly, that a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”

 

Ms. Stoller is in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct including Mass.R.Prof.C. 3.4(c). Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel which states in part: A lawyer shall not: (c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists.

 

Mass.R.Prof.C Advocate Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal reads:
(a)A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer; (3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false; (b) A lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding and who knows that a person intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal,; (c) The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding, and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6.

 

And under Mass.R.Prof.C. 8.4(c, d, h. It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; (h) engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on his or her fitness to practice law.

The Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) reviews the Board’s decisions in part for constitutional error, see Mass.Gen.L. ch. 30A, Sec. 14(7), and is permitted to gather evidence “in cases of alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency [when those irregularities are] not shown in the record.” Mass.Gen.L. ch. 30A, Sec. 14(5). The Court may look beyond the record if it appears the agency deliberately or negligently excluded documents that may have been adverse to its decision.

On a writ of certiorari, the court’s review “is confined to the record and is for the purpose of correcting legal error, [and therefore] the inquiry about the presence or absence of genuine issues of material fact, germane to summary judgment procedure, is inappropriate. . . . [The reviewing court] need only inquire whether the commission’s decision was ‘legally tenable and supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.”‘ Gloucester v. Civil Serv. Comm’n, 408 Mass. 292 , 297 (1990), quoting Commissioner of Health & Hosps. of Boston v. Civil Serv. Comm’n, 23 Mass. App. Ct. 410 , 411 (1987). See G.L.c. 31, s. 2 (b); Mayor of Revere, supra at 319-322.

 

Fraud is distinguished from negligence, ignorance, and error by virtue of the fact that it is intentional; involving some level of calculation. Negligence is: “the failure to use such care as a reasonably prudent and careful person would use under similar circumstances.”   In a professional context, it is defined as: “conduct which falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm… it is characterized chiefly by inadvertence, thoughtlessness, inattention, and the like.”.  Fraud, in contrast, is not accidental in nature, nor is it unplanned.  Those who commit fraud know what they are doing and are deliberate in their efforts. They are also aware that it is unethical, illegal, or otherwise improper.

Fraudulent intent is established by examining the documentation of decisions and behaviors associated with those under suspicion. As explained in Coenen: “Manipulation of documents and evidence is often indicative of such intent. Innocent parties don’t normally alter documents and conceal or destroy evidence.”

As explained in Black’s Law Dictionary,  fraud is an intentional distortion of facts and truth for the purposes of inducing another to give up something of value that they possess or to relinquish a legal right that they might otherwise retain. It is additionally defined as a “false presentation of a matter of fact whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed which deceives and is intended to deceive another.”

I believe it is safe to conclude that the parties here participated in fraud.

The “litigation-packet” did not merely show “chain-of-custody” issues but forensic fraud. Misrepresenting invalid forensic test results as valid is the definition of forensic fraud. Ms. Stoller should have immediately assessed the “clear-weight” of this evidence, entered it into the docket for reconsideration and given me an opportunity to be heard. She did not.

The Federation of State Medical Board Policy specifically requires strict “chain of custody.” She violated the Board’s very own standards and then blocked me from returning to practice by putting barriers in place, refusing to allow independent evaluations and protracting the time –drawing this out in order to cause as much damage as possible to my family and me.

Mr. Bertram alleges PHS has not committed any crimes because the agency has not been charged with any crimes. This is logical fallacy. They have not been charged with any crimes because the very agencies capable of charging them with crimes are ignoring or otherwise overlooking them for various reasons.  Furthermore,  If I see someone being stabbed in the back  I can reasonably conclude it is a crime. Colluding with a laboratory to intentionally misrepresent laboratory data is laboratory fraud and covered under Title 18 of the United States Criminal Code (Wire fraud 18 USC 1343, False Statements 18 USC 1001, Conspiracy 18-USC 371, False Claims 18-USC 287 and Obstruction of Justice 18-USC 1505). I believe all of these are applicable here. In addition Dr. Sanchez violated M.G.L 156 (B) Section 69 by making false statements to a state agency.

PHS has convinced the Board not to “second-guess” their decisions and apparently the Board has convinced state AGOs to not “second-guess” theirs; each presupposing the integrity of the individuals and validity of the decisions of the agencies in question. As a result complaints by doctors of serious crimes and abuse are ignored. Fact and truth do not matter as the agencies blindly support one-another. This removes all aspects of accountability including answerability and justification for one’s actions. It is a flawed system.

In the past the SJC has overturned the Board’s decisions on due process grounds, see, e.g., Morris v. Board of Reg. in Medicine, 405 Mass. 103, 110, 539 N.E.2d 50, 54 (1989) (vacating Board decision because proceedings “denied [the physician] fairness in a due process sense.”).

This interference with the administration of Justice, abuse of authority and denial of constitutional rights warrant the Board Orders be reversed, vacated and corrected. “The touchstone of due process is protection of the individual against arbitrary action of government.” (Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 558 (1974). “[i]n a just society those who govern, as well as those who are governed, must obey the law.” (United States v. Leon, 104 S. Ct. 3430, 3457 (1984) (Stevens, J., dissenting).

The Courts have held that the Massachusetts and Federal Administrative Procedure Acts require both the agency and the court to consider the entire record, including testimony given at the hearing. In Friends of Edgartown Great Pond v. DEP, 446 Mass. 830, 845 (2006), the SJC recognized that the agency must consider the hearing evidence, finding the agency hearing complied with the Administrative Procedure Act requirements because “the record illustrates that over the course of the five-day hearing, the administrative law judge carefully considered all of the relevant evidence.”

 

The record compiled here illustrates that over the course of four years the Board not only failed to carefully consider any of the relevant evidence but most likely never saw any of it.

Our Constitution mandates that level of legal process due to reflect “respect enforced by law for that feeling of just treatment which has been evolved through centuries of Anglo-American constitutional history and civilization.” Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Comm. v. McGrath, 341 U.S. 123, 162, 71 S.Ct. 624, 95 L.Ed. 817 (1951) (Frankfurter, J., concurring)

 

Ms. Stoller violated multiple professional regulations, ethics and the law in an ongoing campaign in which she blocked the administration of justice. By concealing the truth she prevented both exculpatory evidence favorable to my case and detrimental to the opposing party (involving misconduct and crimes from ever coming to light. It is quite clear the full Board never saw these documents. The fact that the latest Board action did not have any of the documents or petitions submitted over the past year is prima facie evidence of Fraud on the Court.  Ms. Stoller needs to be held accountable and I am requesting the SJC uses whatever power it has available to make certain this occurs. Ms. Stoller needs to be disciplined for her actions and this discipline needs to be commensurate with her crime.  In this case nothing less then disbarment and criminal charges would fit that bill.

 

 

In the Matter of Michael L Langan, M.D.

Petitioner

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI (SJC-2015-0267)

TO THE

MASSACHUSETTS

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH

MOTION TO DECIDE THE MATTER ON THE PAPERS DUE TO INTENTIONAL CONCEALMENT OF KEY DOCUMENTS AND “FRAUD ON THE COURT”

The Administrative Record filed by the Board and Assistant Attorney General Bryan Bertram’s oppositional statements suggest that the Director of the Board’s Physician Health and Compliance Unit, Attorney Debra Stoller has been interfering with the administration of justice by suppressing documentation provided as key evidence and the petitionary arguments accompanying them. The amount of missing information is profound and in review of all of the documents including Board Orders and the Board’s oppositional response to my complaint it is evident that the documents were concealed from the full Board. Mr. Bertram’s arguments are based on a very limited record as both exculpatory documents supporting my position and documents indicating misconduct by PHS were intentionally blocked by attorney Deb Stoller in violation of professional regulation consistent with Fraud on the Court. She engaged in misrepresentation, concealment and other misconduct in interference with the administration of justice.

Fraud on the court occurs when the judicial machinery itself has been tainted, such as when an attorney, who is an officer of the court, is involved in the perpetration of a fraud or makes material misrepresentations to the court. Fraud upon the court makes void the orders and judgments of that court. In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a

member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.” Ms. Stoller has in fact violated:

Mass.R.Prof.C. 8.4(c, d, h). Misconduct. It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; (h) engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on his or her fitness to practice law.

Mass.R.Prof.C. 3.4(c). Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel. A lawyer shall not: (c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists;

Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.4: Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel

A lawyer shall not:

(a) unlawfully obstruct another party’s access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy, or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to do any such act;

(b) falsify evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law;

(c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists;

(d) in pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or fail to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by

On March 9, 2015 an Affidavit was filed with this Court (Affidavit of Michael Langan in Support of Motion for Relief Pursuant to Earlier Court Order) because Attorney Deb Stoller refused to schedule a hearing despite this Court’s request that she do so. In this Affidavit I outline the multiple unwarranted and unjustified delays and state “my legitimate concern is that the Board will simply ignore my most recent January 20, 2015 Petition for Re-instatement. My fears are well grounded as the Board has engaged in a persistent pattern of ignoring my every reasonable effort at trying to be re-instated; and the board has abused the administrative law process to accomplish this. It was only after this Affidavit was filed with this Court that Ms. Stoller even put me on the schedule.

It appears my fears were indeed well grounded as they actually did ignore my January 20, 2015 petition. It appears the April 16, 2015 Board Hearing was simply a “sham review” to satisfy this Court’s request.

The Administrative Record compiled for the April 16, 2015 Board Hearing was absent copious relevant documents including the January 20, 2015 Petition on which it was ostensibly based. In fact, the sole petition is close to one year old. Since that time I have submitted five more petitions that are absent. Since that time I have submitted multiple documents and petitions that are not found anywhere in the Board’s record. Although some of the key documents presented to the Board since 2011 are contained therein, there is no index indicating the date they were received and this brings into question when and if these mitigating and even exculpatory documents were ever even considered.

Mr. Bertram’s oppositional statements underscore these violations and bring the abuse of authority and denial of Constitutional rights to a level of outrageousness. Mr. Bertram states “in his most recent petition to the Board to stay the suspension (“January 2015 Petition”), Dr. Langan submitted a report from an independent psychiatric evaluation (favorably opining as to his fitness to practice medicine) satisfying the first condition, but he did not satisfy the Board’s other conditions because he did not propose suitable (or any) monitoring plans with his petition. Instead, Dr. Langan sought to challenge the Board’s findings that he twice previously

violated the LOA even though he never challenged those violations before, and the time to do so has long since passed.” (page 2)

“Dr. Langan had in the past submitted a letter from Dr. Timothy Wilens, dated February 14, 2014, reporting to the Board that to the date of that letter Dr. Langan remained alcohol and substance free. Id at 158. But, that is not evidence that Dr. Langan remained abstinent in the months preceding the January 2015 Petition to the Board.” (page 8)

Mr. Bertram is correct. The February 14, 2014 report from Dr. Wilens does not cover the months preceding the January 2015 Petition to the Board, but the attached letters from Dr. Wilens dated April 24, 2014 and April 3, 2015 certainly do. The January 2015 Petition was heard at an April 16, 2015 Board Hearing and the April 3, 2015 letter from Dr. Wilens states: “I have monitored him (Langan) clinically and over the past year have been ordering and monitoring urine and saliva” toxicology tests and notes he will continue following me. This letter was written 13 days prior to the April 16th Board Hearing but absent from the Administrative Record filed by the Board October 9, 2015. The letter was provided to Board attorney Deb Stoller both by U.S. Postal service and e-mail. Additionally, it was hand delivered with the other supporting documents of my January 2015 Petition to Board attorney Tracy Ottina at the April 16th, 2015 Board Hearing.

The only possible explanation for the absence of this letter from the Administrative Record is that it was intentionally withheld. The fact that Mr. Bertram argues the absence of such documentation was used in the Board’s reasoning process to deny my Petition suggests the Board never saw it.

Due to the limited number of straightforward issues pertaining to my case (i.e. no patient care or other issues that could be used as a pretext)
this rises to the level of a Brady violation. A Brady analysis has three prongs. First, “the evidence at issue must be favorable to the

accused.” Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 281-282, 119 S. Ct. 1936, 144 L. Ed. 2d 286 (1999). Second, it “must have been suppressed by the
state.” Id. at 282, 119 S. Ct. 1936. Third, “prejudice must have
ensued.” The absence of a monitoring plan is the sole issue Mr. Bertram

identifies as being a factor in the Board’s denial of my petition therefore in this context had I provided a monitoring plan my petition would not have been denied. Mr. Bertram goes on to state that I have never challenged the Board’s findings that I violated my Letter of Agreement. The copious documentation I I have provided this court shows I have been challenging these findings since day one and due to the limited number of issues leading to my suspension and the documentary evidence I have provided to Ms. Stoller that is exculpating to me and incriminating for PHS I suspect it was all suppressed.

Ms. Stoller is abusing her position of authority to deny due process and fundamental fairness with the administration of Justice. She is denying Constitutional rights and violating the Rules of Professional Conduct including Mass. R. Prof. C. 3.4(a), (b), (c); 3.3 (a), (b), (c) and 8.4(a), (c), and (d)

Additionally, I have provided evidence that PHS is engaging in crimes making her in violation of Advocate Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal which reads:

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;

(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.

(b) A lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding and who knows that a person intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the

tribunal.

(c) The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding, and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6.

In a November 12, 2015 Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to Petition Mr. Bertram states “… the undersigned Assistant Attorney General discovered that the certified administrative record was potentially incomplete. After conferring with the Board, it was determined that a copy of Dr. Langan’s petition for reconsideration that resulted in the Board order now under review was inadvertently omitted from the record. (The document was also absent from the Board’s internal docket of this proceeding, resulting in the error by the Board’s staff who assembled the record.)

According to the May 7, 2015 Board Order: “The licensee has not submitted any new documentation that contradicts any of the documents cited to above and found in the Board’s February 6, 2013 Order of Suspension. In the absence of such documentation, there is no basis for rescinding the Board’s vote based on this argument.”

In other words, as with Dr. Wilen’s letter, the Board never saw it and the proposition that this was “inadvertent” is implausible.

In addition to Dr. Wilen’s letter, three petitions were filed with the Board of Registration in Medicine in preparation for the April 16, 2015 Board Hearing. These are dated January 20, 2015 and February 20, 2015 and make reference to a September 3, 2014 Petition in which I introduced a recently acquired document from October 4, 2012.

The October 4, 2012 document from United States Drug Testing Labs (USDTL) to Dr. Luis Sanchez reports the invalidity of the confirmatory test from July 2011 and was the result of an investigation by the College of American Pathologists and precedes Dr. Sanchez report to the Board that I was non-compliant by two weeks. It is essentially exculpatory as Sanchez claimed in a written letter to the Board that he had not become cognizant of the invalidity of the test until December 10, 2012 (67-days later) and these contradictory documents in juxtaposition are prima facie evidence of misrepresentation and dishonesty. Sanchez concealed the test revision and reported non-compliance with my monitoring contract to the Board on October 19, 2012, two weeks after he was informed of the tests invalidity.

 

In fact the Administrative Record submitted by the Board contains just one Petition from May 25, 2014 that was submitted after Dr. Patricia Recupero completed her 87-page report opining I was safe to practice medicine without restriction and documenting the misconduct of PHS . This report as well as other supportive documentation previously provided to the Board from July 2011 to April 2014 the time they were produced was included with the petition (pages 153-180).

The record provides no index of when these documents were received. No timeline exists. They are not acknowledged in the written Board orders and no consideration is given to them in their written opinion. This brings into question whether or not this information was even available at the time of both Board orders. Was this information taken into account at the time it was provided or was it intentionally withheld or discarded at the time?

Due to the profound removal of due process and fundamental fairness as well as the inability of Mr. Bertram to develop an accurate oral argument due to the limited information contained in the official record I respectfully request the Court proceed with judicial review based on the documents.

Respectfully Submitted,

Michael Langan, M.D. December 9, 2015

Competent, Ethical and Fair Legal Representation for Doctors —A Possible New Niche area for Lawyers.

mllangan1's avatarDisrupted Physician

Wretched creatures are compelled by the severity of the torture to confess things they have never done and so by cruel butchery innocent lives are taken; and by new alchemy, gold and silver are coined from human blood.– Father Cornelius Loos (1592)


17th-century-tribunal

 “PHP-Approved Attorneys”

My survey has revealed an additional factor stacking the deck and removing accountability from PHPs.  The attorneys ostensibly representing doctors are also part of the racket.

A doctor referred to a PHP will be given a list of 3 or 4 attorneys by the PHP who are “experienced in working with the medical board.” What they do not tell you is that theses attorneys are hand-picked or cultivated to abide by the rules dictated by the PHP.

They will not “bite the hand that feeds” and any procedural, ethical or criminal misconduct by the PHP will not be addressed.     Laboratory fraud, false diagnoses, and Establishment Clause violations are off…

View original post 184 more words

“Sham Peer Review”–Informative Discussion of the Underhanded Tactics Used by the Morally Disengaged Bullies Who Have Occupied the Medical Profession

Dr.  Lawrence Huntoon lectures on the common tactics used by the enemy forces who have taken an uninvited seat at the table of power in the regulation and control of the noble profession of medicine.  Collectively this band of nitwits and thugs  represent an enemy occupation and the damage has been ruinous to both the science and the art.  Clinical decision making has been reduced to algorithmic pathways and binary options that throw knowledge base and clinical acumen out the window and replaced them with  a heap of feel-good bottom-line poorly constructed dictates. These simple-minded marauders are nothing more than idiots with sticks but they’ve bamboozled the citizenry,  sweetheart-swindled the politicians and Robber barroned  their  morally disengaged  logical  fallacy into bandwagon reality under the rhetoric of cost containment and public welfare.

An enemy force has occupied our turf and it has indeed been ruinous.  Pride, integrity and enlightenment  have been torn out of the medical profession by the acceptance of poisonous ideas and concrete thinking and this disease  has  viruntly spread  from regulatory agencies to hospital administrators to those charged with governing academic medicine.

I recently spoke with a medical resident who yelled at a nurse as she was about to fatally inject  an anti-arrythmic medication at 10x the dose into a patient’s IV.   Had he not intervened the patient would in all probability have died and he undoubtedly saved  the patient’s life.  This fact is irrelevant in the current climate as the nurse he yelled at reported him for it and instead of seeing this as an acute human emotional response in a tense situation where a patient’s life was in danger,  the powers that be interpreted it as a red flag and recommended he be assessed for anger issues.  The evaluators suggested an inpatient evaluation and the assessing facility recommened treatment in their cash-only facility which, as a resident physician,  he did not have the means to pay.  Without the treatment he could not return to his residency program.  The nurse who almost killed this patient was cleared ( it was deemed a systems error) of any wrongdoing while the doctor who saved the patients  life has potentially lost  his career because he exhibited an understandable human response to a crises situation –  Apparently he should have said “pretty please” or whispered “just don’t let this happen again”

I heard of another case in which  a patient had  had multiple colonoscopies, endoscopies and batteries of lab tests for an undiagnosed gastrointestinal ailment for which no one could come up with a diagnosis.  The patient subsequently consulted with an independent astute diagnostician and who came up with an accurate yet unusual diagnosis; a so called zebra among the horses and he was able to treat the condition and the.symptoms abated within a week.  Coming up with the correct diagnosis when others have failed is an accomplishment that has historically generated the praise of one’s colleagues; met with respect, admiration, a toast and round of applause. But those days are long gone and instead of accolades this astute diagnostician and finder of the cause and cure of a difficult diagnosis got a raft of shit and sneers as the sniveling sheeple dong repeated colonoscopies without a clue felt disrespected.  He made them look bad.  He failed to communicate with them and they reported him to hospital administration for being “unprofessional” An investigation ensued that took on a life of its own.  Mobbing and sham peer review followed and he ended up dying by suicide– A death sentence for making a brilliant and correct diagnosis.

Question Authority: The Need for Anti-Authoritarians in the Medical Profession

mllangan1's avatarDisrupted Physician

Screen Shot 2015-05-30 at 7.27.10 PM
Anti-authoritarians question whether an authority is a legitimate one before taking that authority seriously.  images-24To evaluate the legitimacy of  an authority it is necessary to:
1. Assess whether they actually know what they are talking about.   2. Assess whether the authorities are honest in their intentions.
When anti-authoritarians assess an authority to be illegitimate, they challenge and resist that authority.
There is a paucity of anti-authoritarianism in the medical community concerning groups that have gained tremendous sway in the regulation of the medical profession.    There is, in fact, an absence of anti-authoritarian questioning  of  what is essentially illegitimate and irrational authority.
images-26
Most doctors are unaware of the impact these organizations have had on both the regulation of the medical profession and social control of individual doctors.  Through “moral entrepreneurship” and “bent science” these groups have successfully swayed both policy-makers and the public to support an agenda not supported by reality…

View original post 379 more words

Documentary Evidence of Top-Down Corruption–See how PHP Colludes with USDTL Labs in Forensic Fraud

mllangan1's avatarDisrupted Physician

IMG_9516“A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.”
― Thomas Paine 

USDTL drug testing laboratory claims to advance the”Gold Standard in Forensic Toxicology.”  “Integrity: Results that you can trust, based on solid science” is listed as a corporate value. “Unlike other laboratories, our drug and alcohol testing begins and ends with strict chain of custody.” “When people’s lives are on the line, we don’t skip steps.”  Joseph Jones, Vice President of Laboratory Operations explains the importance of chain-of-custody in this USDTL video presentation.

Dr. Luis Sanchez, M.D. recently published an article entitled Disruptive Behaviors Among Physicians in the Journal of the American Medical Association discussing the importance of  of a “medical culture of safety” with “clear expectations and standards.”  Stressing the importance of values and codes-of-conduct in the practice of medicine, he calls on physician leaders  “commit to professional behavior.”

Sanchez is Past President of…

View original post 4,769 more words

A Prayer of Gratitude- John F. Kennedy

mllangan1's avatarDisrupted Physician

“As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.”– Thanksgiving Day Proclamation 1963—John F. Kennedy.

IMG_1072Let us therefore proclaim our gratitude to Providence for manifold blessings–let us be humbly thankful for inherited ideals–and let us resolve to share those blessings and those ideals with our fellow human beings throughout the world.

On that(this) day let us gather in sanctuaries dedicated to worship and in homes blessed by family affection to express our gratitude for the glorious gifts of God; and let us earnestly and humbly pray that He will continue to guide and sustain us in the great unfinished tasks of achieving peace, justice, and understanding among all men and nations and of ending misery and suffering wherever they exist.

–Thanksgiving Day, 1963

Screen Shot 2015-11-23 at 7.31.29 PM.png

View original post

Reefer Mad and Power Hungry

Link to article:https://digboston.com/reefer-mad-and-power-hungry/

Please comment on DigBoston website

Screen Shot 2015-11-23 at 1.39.49 PMScreen Shot 2015-11-23 at 1.34.24 PM

In 2013, Dr. Steven Adelman of Physician Health Services (PHS)—a powerful nonprofit founded by the Massachusetts Medical Society that provides help to residents and doctors struggling with substance abuse problems—published a now-infamous article on KevinMD titled, “Against the Medicalization of Marijuana,” in which he lambasted the 63 percent of voters who supported the Massachusetts initiative petition to eliminate criminal and civil penalties for marijuana by qualifying patients with diagnosed debilitating medical conditions. Blasting the mandate for the Department of Public Health to “operationalize the so-called medicinal use of cannabis in the Commonwealth,” Adelman wrote, “the community of physicians has been scratching its collective head and wondering, ‘What in the world are we going to do about patient requests to become certified to purchase, or grow, so-called medical marijuana?’”

In his report, Adelman noted the alleged perilousness of addiction, withdrawal, and cognitive impairment related to cannabis, and warned of the potential onslaught of underground entrepreneurs waiting to capitalize. Adelman, a so-called addiction expert at Harvard Vanguard, predicted a floodgate of unscrupulous profiteers diverting “massive” amounts of this “valuable” “addictive” “substance” to “non-patients,” and guessed that the health and well-being of the “greater public will be jeopardized for the relief of a few.”

As noted by many activists but ignored by all but niche marijuana media, in another instance, Adelmanblamed the bombing of the Boston Marathon on “marijuana withdrawal.” One of his cohorts, Dr. Robert Dupont of the Institute for Behavior and Health, rode a similar bandwagon, arguing that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev smoked his way to failure and, because of a disappointing report card, said, “Fuck it, I’ll become a terrorist.” DuPont also served as director for the  National Institute on Drug Abuse and currently runs one of the largest Employee Assistance Programs (EAP) in the U.S. with former DEA honcho Peter Bensinger. These guys are in the drug-testing business!

Most doctors don’t think like this. That includes most members of the Massachusetts Medical Society. But very few speak out about the fraud being carried out against the legalized medicinal use of cannabis. How does the same medical society that publishes the New England Journal of Medicine allow this type of tripe and rabble to evade editorial scrutiny? Why no backlash from dissenting doctors? Easy, no one has stood up to Adelman because as the head of an influential Physician Health Program (PHP) like PHS, he has power over the license of every doctor in Mass.

Such state operations have come under major scrutiny. A recent Medscape article titled “Physician Health Programs: More Harm Than Good?” reveals patterns of anonymous referrals, false diagnoses, and a lack of credible process. These state-based programs appear to have created a climate of fear in doctors, as all it takes is an anonymous referral to someone like Adelman to ruin a career. For these reasons, many doctors will not even talk about medical marijuana privately, let alone in public out of fear that they might get referred to their state PHP.

It’s hard to know who to hold accountable for these lies. PHS operates under the national Federation of State Physician Health Programs (FSPHP), which is located in Massachusetts. Meanwhile, the FSPHP is an arm of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM), which also pushes self-serving public policy under the guise of contributing to the greater good. That despite the Massachusetts Medical Society’s charge to “do all things as may be necessary and appropriate to advance medical knowledge, to develop and maintain the highest professional and ethical standards of medical practice and health care, and to promote medical institutions formed on liberal principles for the health, benefit and welfare of citizens of the commonwealth.”

Dr. Langan was an instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School and an assistant professor of medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital for more than 15 years. He is a co-founder of a medical device startup and blogs at disruptedphysician.com.

DR. MICHAEL LANGAN

“Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth.” – John F. Kennedy.

IMG_0894.JPG

“Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth.” – John F. Kennedy.

Born – May 29, 1917
Brookline, Massachusetts,
Died- November 22, 1963
Dallas, Texas, aged 46