Latest news with #MedicalBoard
Reuters
3 days ago
- Health
- Reuters
US court upholds California's implicit bias training mandate for doctors
July 25 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Friday rejected claims that California violated the free speech rights of doctors who teach continuing medical education courses by mandating that they include information on implicit bias. A unanimous three-judge panel, opens new tab of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that because the content of the courses, known as CMEs, is dictated by the state, it amounts to government speech shielded from constitutional scrutiny regardless of who delivers the message. The Medical Board of California requires physicians and surgeons to complete CMEs to maintain their licenses, and approves and accredits courses offered by doctors including Azadeh Khatibi, an ophthalmologist and the plaintiff in Friday's case. A 2021 state law requires that CMEs include information about implicit, or unconscious, bias and the potential for doctors to treat patients differently based on their race, sex or other factors. Khatibi and the nonprofit Do No Harm, which advocates against what it calls "radical, divisive and discriminatory ideologies" in the medical profession, say the law unlawfully forces instructors to endorse speech with which they may not agree in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. But the 9th Circuit said that speech belongs to the government, as it has more than a century of closely regulating the medical profession and adopting detailed requirements for CMEs. "If physicians are cognizant that their profession is heavily regulated [and] that they attend CMEs primarily to secure credits to maintain their licenses ... then 'common sense' commands that licensees could attribute approved CMEs' content to California," Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen wrote. The panel included Circuit Judges A. Wallace Tashima and Salvador Mendoza. All three judges are appointees of Democratic presidents. Caleb Trotter of Pacific Legal Foundation, who represents Khatibi and Do No Harm, said the libertarian group was disappointed with the ruling and is considering its options. "If continuing medical education courses in California are 'government speech' as the panel decided today, then there is little to stop governments around the country from compelling continuing education instructors in any trade or profession to profess all manner of controversial state-endorsed topics," Trotter said in an emailed statement. Many states in recent years have conditioned professional licenses for doctors, lawyers, teachers and others on completing diversity or anti-racism training, prompting backlash from some professionals and conservative groups. A Michigan dentist represented by Pacific Legal filed a lawsuit, opens new tab in April over a state licensing requirement that healthcare providers complete implicit bias training. Last year, the St. Louis-based 8th Circuit rejected claims, opens new tab that a Missouri school district violated employees' free-speech rights by requiring them to attend anti-racism training. Friday's decision affirms a 2024 ruling by U.S. District Judge Monica Ramirez Almadani in Santa Ana, California, that dismissed the lawsuit by Khatibi and Do No Harm. The case is Khatibi v. Hawkins, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-3108. For Khatibi and Do No Harm: Joshua Thompson and Caleb Trotter of Pacific Legal Foundation For the state: Kristin Liska of the California Attorney General's office Read more: US court leery of free-speech challenge to school's anti-racism training U.S. law students to receive anti-bias training after ABA passes new rule
CBC
15-07-2025
- Health
- CBC
Fredericton psychiatrist doesn't fight sexual misconduct allegations
Dr. Manoj Bhargava could lose his medical licence permanently after a disciplinary hearing looks into allegations of sexual misconduct.
Malaysian Reserve
08-07-2025
- Health
- Malaysian Reserve
California Senate Committee Advances Bill to Expose Patients to Doctor Substance Abuse, Says Consumer watchdog
SACRAMENTO, Calif., July 7, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Despite pleas from families throughout California, who have voiced their concerns about exposing patients to substance-abusing doctors, the Senate Business & Professions Committee advanced AB 408 by an initial vote of 7 to 1. AB 408, authored by Assemblymember Berman and sponsored by the Medical Board of California, would create a secret drug and alcohol 'diversion program' where the Board would send doctors who have substance abuse problems, instead of taking disciplinary action. AB 408 does not require disclosure to Medical Board enforcement staff, or consequences, for a doctor in the program that fails a drug test, skips a drug test, or otherwise violates the program. This silence about relapse by doctors who are actively treating patients is not limited to doctors who choose treatment voluntarily, as proponents claim. It applies to doctors sent to the program by the Board who would otherwise have faced discipline, including those found using substances at work, said Consumer Watchdog. KGTV San Diego ran this recent story about the secret drug program. The chair of the committee, Senator Angelique Ashby, voiced her reservations about the bill, mirroring many of the concerns raised by medical negligence survivors, Consumer Watchdog and the Consumer Protection Policy Center. Senator Caroline Menjivar also highlighted a troubling scenario: physicians under the influence could potentially arrive at work and, if discovered before causing any harm to patients, be allowed to enter the program. She said this raises a critical question – how many of these doctors might have worked while impaired in the weeks prior without ever being caught? Tina Minasian, an advocate for patient rights in California, suffers lifelong injuries inflicted by a substance-abusing surgeon who was a participant in the former confidential physician diversion program. She played a pivotal role in advocating for the closure of the prior failed Diversion Program. 'I can't believe that eighteen years later I have to take on this fight again on behalf of all Californians,' stated Minasian who testified at today's hearing. 'We gained too many protections in the past fifteen years to give them up. I lost everything when I was harmed and cannot allow another Californian to endure what I did.' The Medical Board's prior diversion program was abolished after failing five state audits because doctors who entered the program could relapse with no consequences and patients were harmed. To prevent this from happening again, the Legislature passed oversight rules called the 'Uniform Standards' and applied them to doctors in diversion programs. AB 408 exempts doctors from the law, eliminating oversight and accountability from the program. Consumer Watchdog has urged preserving those patient protections. The bill would allow doctors to seek treatment to avoid discipline even if they were impaired on the job. For example: A San Francisco doctor suspected of stealing drugs from her hospital was recently arrested after she was found passed out in an operating room shortly after she was scheduled to participate in a toddler's surgery. Under AB 408 the Board could send that doctor into diversion instead of the disciplinary investigation, treatment oversight and consequences for relapse that are all mandatory under current law. The bill does not require reporting of a positive drug test to the Board, so the doctor could continue treating patients while keeping diversion program violations secret and place patients in harm's way. Read Consumer Watchdog's opposition letters on AB 408 here and here. The former confidential physician diversion program was subjected to a critical sunset review in 2007 after five failed audits by the state and a critical report from an Enforcement Monitor revealed significant failures in drug testing and oversight. In response, patients stepped forward to share their harrowing stories of harm and loss due to the negligence of doctors in the program. The Medical Board of California recognized the severity of these revelations and terminated the program in 2008. That same year, a pivotal hearing on the diversion program was convened at the state Capitol. The chair of the joint committee announced SB 1441, legislation designed to establish Uniform Standards for Substance-Abusing Health Care Professionals in California. Passed into law in 2008, SB 1441 was a vital step toward rectifying the failures of the previous diversion program. It empowered the Medical Board with essential tools to monitor substance-abusing licensees and enforce meaningful consequences for offending physicians, prioritizing the protection of patients and fostering a culture of accountability among healthcare providers. In 2016, SB 1177 was enacted, which allowed the Medical Board of California to recreate a new physician diversion program that adhered to the Uniform Standards. AB 408 discards those consumer protections and reconfigures any future program in the image of the failed diversion program. AB 408 is expected to be heard before the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 15th.
News.com.au
15-06-2025
- Health
- News.com.au
Controversial GP resumes ‘David v Goliath' battle over Covid-19 vaccines
A sign on the window at Dr Mark Hobart's clinic in Melbourne's west reads: 'The Victorian Government has banned patients from entering this surgery because Dr Hobart refused to surrender your private and confidential patient files.' It was erected in 2021, during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic where the Daniel Andrews Government had imposed some of the harshest lockdowns on the planet. Three-and-a-half years on, the North Sunshine Surgery remains closed and Dr Hobart — who has been a GP there since 1985 — remains unable to practice medicine. The controversial GP, who is well-known in anti-vaccine groups, is accused of professional misconduct and being a danger to the public over the administering of fake vaccination exemptions and the anti-parasitic drug, Ivermectin. Dr Hobart 'denies any wrongdoing' and 'maintains he fulfilled his duty to his patients at all times'. He says he told the truth about vaccines and their risks when the Andrews Government was enforcing polarising vaccination mandates. 'David vs Goliath battle' resumes His 'David v Goliath' battle with the Medical Board of Australia — described that way by his lawyer Matthew Hopkins — resumed this week before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. 'Not all heroes wear capes,' Mr Hopkins wrote on social media ahead of the three-day hearing. '(Dr Hobart issued) 1797 vaccination exemptions, all legitimate, and no Covid vaccines administered. 'Very much a David v Goliath battle.' The battle this week focused on how authorities seized documents in November, 2021 after the federal medical watchdog AHPRA received a tip-off about what was going on at Dr Hobart's clinic. Dr Hobart's lawyer argued patient files which contained protected information, were seized unlawfully and were an example of an 'egregious abuse of power'. 'We say on the balance of probability that these documents were unlawfully seized,' Mr Hopkins told VCAT. 'The correct pathway, via a warrant, was available. We say that it was open to AHPRA ... that the correct legislative pathway for them to obtain the (documents) was through the warrant process. 'We say that the unlawfully obtained evidence contained within the seized patient files should not be admitted. It's an egregious abuse of power. Dr Hobart — his practise has been shut down ever since. It's a legitimate practice of medicine for vaccination exemptions to be given.' But VCAT Senior Member John Billings disagreed. He rejected the argument that the documents were inadmissible and told Dr Hobart's lawyer that the use of the term 'egregious' was over the top. 'Mr Hopkins called it egregious. It could not be described as grave or egregious or reckless,' he said. Dr Hobart took to social media to share the outcome on Thursday afternoon. 'The judge said that he was not satisfied the evidence was improperly or illegally obtained,' he wrote. 'In other words. Those authorised officers didn't do anything wrong.' He continued: 'Senior Member Billings also said, even if it was illegally or improperly obtained, it still should be admitted as evidence.' The tribunal will reconvene later this year to test whether Dr Hobart is a danger to the public. Details aired about clash at Dr Hobart's surgery VCAT this week heard how members of the public were seen coming and going — allegedly without masks — from Dr Hobart's surgery in late October, 2021 and leaving with paperwork. A team member from the Victorian Department of Health, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, told VCAT they 'witnessed a large amount of people' at the clinic. 'Male, female, young and old coming in and out of the clinic without facemasks,' he said. 'We had a concern these exemptions were given under false pretences. Dr Hobart was there, his wife, a receptionist or clerk and another young female staff member who didn't really engage with us at the time. There were also patients in the waiting room. 'There were also a crowd of supporters out the front who greeted us as we entered on the day. 'We were searching for records of vaccination exemption forms. We had a real fear about the lack of face masks when we've got an airborne virus out there that is a direct concern for the members of the general public and people are coming and going freely without face masks and the staff in the clinic were also not wearing face masks which opened them to spread of coronavirus. 'The situation became very volatile. I was very focused on the movements of supporters and staff.' 'Email Brett Sutton and Martin Foley' Dr Hobart was outspoken about the perceived overreach by authorities in Victoria during the pandemic. In an interview with an anti-vaccination forum at the time, Dr Hobart said he was simply 'trying to stick to the facts'. 'The journal articles, discussions with respected colleagues etc, I really don't wish to speculate. 'If we can spread this message like this to as many people as we can then we hopefully WE will get some public movement going, increase the understanding of the people because the mainstream media is not going to do anything, it appears, so we have to do everything ourselves,' he said. 'I think emailing members of parliament, if people let them know how strongly they felt, I think that's a good idea. To email Brett Sutton, perhaps the Minister of Health, Martin Foley, people like that.' When his North Sunshine clinic was closed to the public, there were no shortage of supporters. 'He's very calming, very understanding. It's a shame what they've done to him,' one woman said. 'Now I've got issues. I need certificates and I can't get my hands on my files,' another supporter said. Residents of metropolitan Melbourne were subjected to six lockdowns that lasted more than 260 days in 2020 and 2021. It was named the most locked-down city in the world. No criminal charges or findings have been made against Dr Hobart. His suspension from practicing medicine will last as long as the investigation continues.
India Today
10-06-2025
- Health
- India Today
Bombay High Court allows abortion of 24-week pregnancy of 14-year-old rape survivor
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday permitted a 14-year-old girl from Maharashtra's Raigad to abort her pregnancy, if she so desires. The minor, a survivor of sexual assault by a man she had met on Instagram, was in the 24th week of case came to light when the girl's mother noticed that she had not menstruated for six months. A hospital visit confirmed the pregnancy, leading to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against the Manisha Jagtap, appearing for the minor who is currently admitted to a hospital in Raigad, submitted that the girl was unwilling and unable to carry the pregnancy to full term. Under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, a pregnancy may be terminated for up to 20 weeks without court approval. Since the girl had crossed this threshold, court permission was required for the procedure. On June 6, the High Court directed the Surgeon of the Civil Hospital, Alibaug, Raigad, to set up a Medical Board to assess the minor's condition. The court also asked the Board to evaluate her mental health. The Board later submitted its report stating the girl was anemic, and the termination procedure could only be carried out after correcting her hemoglobin the matter was heard again on Tuesday, the bench interacted with the Medical Board doctors, who confirmed that the minor was now fit to undergo the procedure. The doctors also assured the court that there were no foreseeable complications from the procedure that might affect the girl's ability to conceive in the future—an aspect that had concerned the these assurances, the High Court granted permission for the termination. Additionally, it directed the trial court handling the FIR under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act to expedite the determination of interim compensation for the Watch
