Embedded Files
Doctors Continue To Be Charged AFTER Bill Passes
The NY Coalition (members listed here), in an effort to get a bill passed for the sake of passing a bill, were agreeable to adding an amendment to the bill, one they had not seen, AFTER THE BILL WAS PASSED.
And they were warned and warned again not to do it. This is likened to giving someone a blank check with your signature on it and hoping they will do the right thing. Except in this case, people's lives are at stake, doctor's livelihoods are in the balance and a Lyme patient's access to a Lyme treating doctor is in jeopardy.
Senator Kemp Hannon, bill sponsor, has never been a friend to the Lyme community and that is a well known fact, yet the handful of people pushing this bill- glory hounds they are- didn't care and allowed- actually pushed- this bill to pass, claimed it as a big victory, and left it in the Sponsors and Governor's hands to add more to the bill, sight unseen.
LIVES ARE AT STAKE!
STOP PLAYING WITH LEGISLATORS!
WHEN A BILL GOES BAD, KILL IT!
From The National Lyme Disease Association
QUOTE- "In Dec 2014, Governor Cuomo signed the Lyme disease doctor protection bill into law. When he signed, he indicated he only signed on the condition an amendment would be passed in the New Year (2015), and at that time, the amendment was not made public, but some groups were told it would be just a "technical" amendment.
Due to the uncertain nature of that amendment and lack of process transparency, the LDA withheld its judgment on the New York bill with the upcoming amendment and how it might affect New York doctors treating long term. After examining the amendment, now released by NYS and yet to be passed, the LDA does NOT support its adoption."
QUOTE- "On balance, the proposed new language may be more harmful than helpful in protecting licensed health care practitioners from intrusive investigations lacking a meritorious basis and may facilitate rather than discourage investigations (no matter how they are labeled) launched to find something wrong. The question becomes, "Why pass something that, in the best case, would be unlikely to provide any significant benefit or relief, but may likely make things significantly worse?"
(See amendment text here http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S1693-2015.)
Link To Lyme Disease Association's History On Bill & Gutting That Ensued
BILL WORDING
(R, C, IP) 6TH SENATE DISTRICT
S1693 - DETAILS
S1693 - DETAILS
Law Section:
Public Health Law
Laws Affected:
Amd §230, Pub Health L
S1693 - SUMMARY
S1693 - SUMMARY
Relates to the identification, charging, reporting and investigation of
charges of professional misconduct by health care professionals.
S1693 - SPONSOR MEMO
S1693 - SPONSOR MEMO
BILL NUMBER:S1693 REVISED MEMO 01/21/2015 TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the public health law, in relation to identification, charging, reporting and investigation of charges of professional misconduct by health care professionals PURPOSE: A law adopted in December 2014 codified a nine (9) year old policy used by the Office of Professional Conduct (OPMC) for matters about New York physicians. The purpose of this longstanding policy, and the enactment into law was to continue an appropriate response to complaints about physicians and to promote effective care of patients, while allowing varying modalities used in treatment, including treatment of tick-borne diseases such as Lyme, even if that effective treatment had not achieved universal acceptance by all physicians. This chapter amendment assures preliminary review of the facts and circumstances of all complaints, a process currently carried out under OPMC protocols. SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: Section 1 amends subdivision 9-b of section 230 of the public health law to clarify that investigations by OPMC of complaints based solely upon the recommendation or provision of a treatment modality to a particular patient that is not universally accepted shall be limited
- VIEW MORE (88 LINES)
S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 1693 2015-2016 Regular Sessions I N S E N A T E January 14, 2015 ___________ Introduced by Sen. HANNON -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Rules AN ACT to amend the public health law, in relation to identification, charging, reporting and investigation of charges of professional misconduct by health care professionals THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subdivision 9-b of section 230 of the public health law, as added by chapter 532 of the laws of 2014, is amended to read as follows: 9-b. Neither the board for professional medical conduct nor the office of professional medical conduct shall [identify,] charge A LICENSEE WITH MISCONDUCT AS DEFINED IN SECTIONS SIXTY-FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY AND SIXTY-FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY-ONE OF THE EDUCATION LAW, or cause a report made to the director of such office to be investigated BEYOND A PRELIMI- NARY REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN CLAUSE (A) OF SUBPARAGRAPH (I) OF PARAGRAPH
(A) OF SUBDIVISION TEN OF THIS SECTION, WHERE SUCH REPORT IS DETERMINED TO BE based solely upon the recommendation or provision of a treatment modality TO A PARTICULAR PATIENT by [a] SUCH licensee that is not universally accepted by the medical profession, including but not limit- ed to, varying modalities used in the treatment of Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases. [As used in this subdivision the term "licen- see" shall mean a physician, physician's assistant, and specialist's assistant.]
When a licensee, acting in accordance with paragraph e of subdivision four of section sixty-five hundred twenty-seven of the education law, recommends or provides a treatment modality that effec- tively treats human disease, pain, injury, deformity or physical condi- tion FOR WHICH THE LICENSEE IS TREATING A PATIENT, the recommendation or provision of that modality TO A PARTICULAR PATIENT shall not, by itself, constitute professional misconduct. [This prohibition shall not exoner- ate such licensee from otherwise applicable professional requirements] EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. S LBD07678-01-5
S. 1693 2 THE LICENSEE SHALL OTHERWISE ABIDE BY ALL OTHER APPLICABLE PROFESSIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
S 2. Subparagraph (i) of paragraph (a) of subdivision 10 of section 230 of the public health law, is amended by chapter 542 of the laws of 2000, is amended to read as follows: (i) (A) The board for professional medical conduct, by the director of the office of professional medical conduct, may investigate on its own any suspected professional misconduct, and shall investigate each complaint received regardless of the source.
BY THE CONCLUSION OF A PRELIMINARY REVIEW, INCLUDING AN INTERNAL CLINICAL REVIEW, THE DIRECTOR SHALL DETERMINE IF A REPORT IS BASED SOLELY UPON THE RECOMMENDATION OR PROVISION OF A TREATMENT MODALITY BY A LICENSEE THAT IS NOT UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED BY THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO VARYING MODALITIES USED IN THE TREATMENT OF LYME DISEASE OR OTHER TICK-BORNE DISEASES. UPON A DETERMINATION BY THE DIRECTOR THAT A REPORT IS BASED SOLELY UPON THE PROVISION OF A TREATMENT MODALITY THAT IS NOT UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED, NO FURTHER REVIEW SHALL BE CONDUCTED AND NO
CHARGES SHALL BE BROUGHT. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PRECLUDE THE DIRECTOR FROM MAKING SUCH A DETERMINATION EARLIER IN, OR SUBSEQUENT TO, A PRELIM- INARY REVIEW.
(B) The director of the office of professional medical conduct shall cause a preliminary review of every report made to the department pursuant to section twenty-eight hundred three-e as added by chapter eight hundred sixty-six of the laws of nineteen hundred eighty, sections twenty-eight hundred five-l and forty-four hundred five-b of this chapter, and section three hundred fifteen of the insurance law, to determine if such report reasonably appears to reflect physician conduct warranting further investigation pursuant to this subparagraph.
S 3. This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to any professional discipline matter or administrative or judicial review thereof pending on or after the date on which this act shall take effect; provided, however, that the amendments to subparagraph (i) of paragraph (a) of subdivision 10 of section 230 of the public health law made by section two of this act shall not affect the expiration of such paragraph and shall be deemed to expire therewith.
- VIEW LESS
Google Sites
Report abuse