fammed2002
05-27-2007, 08:17 PM
Hello,
I have some ideas/suggestions how state medical boards could improve
1) If you read the board minutes from various states doctors who abused
drugs/patients multiple times are given license again but the international
grad licensed in 4 states is not granted licensure.
2) state medical boards should consider input from residents of their state more seriously. for example senate bill 36 in texas was opposed by the senate which is probably closely influenced by the texas medical board.
house voted 144-0 to approve the bill. The senate did not concur
and are now sending a bill which looks like more of the same language
and statutes as from before.
3) Yes state medical boards can be dishonest; check out the minutes
from sept and november 2004 (tenn med board). The board states
they have no information about spartan medical school yet licensed
atleast 10 grads and have residents at different programs in tenn
currently. They cite an article from a newspaper as part of their basis
regarding not granting Dr S. licensure. This doctor was resident of
the year his third year and is licensed in atleast 4 states.
4) The fees that doctors are paying need to be examined. Tenn is
making doctors pay $400 in a tax to maintain the license; this is
separate from the renewal fee. Doctors are paying unreasonable
amounts to fund this state bureaucracy.
5) The criteria for licensure should more federalized. Each state can
sanction a doctor if need be but this would more make licensing more fair
and prevent the current discriminatory practices. Criteria should be
more uniform; if you can get a license in the bordering states then
what makes the state in question any different.
6)The patient who receives care at a government facility can be treated by
a physician from any state. If that state would not allow that physician licensing then
how can that patient be treated by the physician. Patients seeking care at indian health services and veteran affairs clinics in that state deserve the same care that any state resident would get. If you can treat the american indian and veteran
population of the state then the general population is no different.
7)The makeup of each state medical board should be reviewed to see that
the voices and concerns of foreign medical graduates are heard. If all members are local allopathic graduates then they are not likely to show any concern for the issues and problems that international graduates face.
8)It would be good to collect information and experiences from physicians
who contested cases of denial of licensure from parties who are willing to share this
information to benefit those applicants in the future. This could include but is not limited to contact information and rulings from courts of appeals and higher courts.
9)It is known that state medical rules/guidelines can be changed by
legislation via amendment or creation of new rules. When a physician applicant
really needs to live in that particular for family reasons but relocates to another
state to work instead of seeing what is possible. This is a lengthy process but
is worthwhile for some.
10)A physician who has “denial of licensure”on their record while contesting a state medical board endures great hardship for obtaining employment and getting
credentialed for hospitals and insurances. A discussion with the federal of state medical boards must be done whether the initial denial can be reported or should not be reported until a contested case hearing before the medical board has occurred. And if the denial of licensure is reported there must a mechanism whereby the physician can write his side of the situation. This reporting mechanism is to intimidate and dissuade physicians from challenging medical boards even when they are clearly in the wrong.
11)
Reciprocity of licensure and standardization of licensing application
procedures should be encouraged to speed licensure and allow physicians to start work promptly. Agreements of reciprocity should be easily obtainable on the state medical board website.
regards,
fammed2002
I have some ideas/suggestions how state medical boards could improve
1) If you read the board minutes from various states doctors who abused
drugs/patients multiple times are given license again but the international
grad licensed in 4 states is not granted licensure.
2) state medical boards should consider input from residents of their state more seriously. for example senate bill 36 in texas was opposed by the senate which is probably closely influenced by the texas medical board.
house voted 144-0 to approve the bill. The senate did not concur
and are now sending a bill which looks like more of the same language
and statutes as from before.
3) Yes state medical boards can be dishonest; check out the minutes
from sept and november 2004 (tenn med board). The board states
they have no information about spartan medical school yet licensed
atleast 10 grads and have residents at different programs in tenn
currently. They cite an article from a newspaper as part of their basis
regarding not granting Dr S. licensure. This doctor was resident of
the year his third year and is licensed in atleast 4 states.
4) The fees that doctors are paying need to be examined. Tenn is
making doctors pay $400 in a tax to maintain the license; this is
separate from the renewal fee. Doctors are paying unreasonable
amounts to fund this state bureaucracy.
5) The criteria for licensure should more federalized. Each state can
sanction a doctor if need be but this would more make licensing more fair
and prevent the current discriminatory practices. Criteria should be
more uniform; if you can get a license in the bordering states then
what makes the state in question any different.
6)The patient who receives care at a government facility can be treated by
a physician from any state. If that state would not allow that physician licensing then
how can that patient be treated by the physician. Patients seeking care at indian health services and veteran affairs clinics in that state deserve the same care that any state resident would get. If you can treat the american indian and veteran
population of the state then the general population is no different.
7)The makeup of each state medical board should be reviewed to see that
the voices and concerns of foreign medical graduates are heard. If all members are local allopathic graduates then they are not likely to show any concern for the issues and problems that international graduates face.
8)It would be good to collect information and experiences from physicians
who contested cases of denial of licensure from parties who are willing to share this
information to benefit those applicants in the future. This could include but is not limited to contact information and rulings from courts of appeals and higher courts.
9)It is known that state medical rules/guidelines can be changed by
legislation via amendment or creation of new rules. When a physician applicant
really needs to live in that particular for family reasons but relocates to another
state to work instead of seeing what is possible. This is a lengthy process but
is worthwhile for some.
10)A physician who has “denial of licensure”on their record while contesting a state medical board endures great hardship for obtaining employment and getting
credentialed for hospitals and insurances. A discussion with the federal of state medical boards must be done whether the initial denial can be reported or should not be reported until a contested case hearing before the medical board has occurred. And if the denial of licensure is reported there must a mechanism whereby the physician can write his side of the situation. This reporting mechanism is to intimidate and dissuade physicians from challenging medical boards even when they are clearly in the wrong.
11)
Reciprocity of licensure and standardization of licensing application
procedures should be encouraged to speed licensure and allow physicians to start work promptly. Agreements of reciprocity should be easily obtainable on the state medical board website.
regards,
fammed2002