DialysisEthics2_Forum
General Discussion => Patient Advocacy => Topic started by: admin on October 14, 2009, 07:02:35 PM
-
Arlene
Site Admin
Joined: 02 Feb 2003
Posts: 49
Posted: 03 Sep 2009 19:57 Post subject: ANOTHER PATIENT DISMISSAL IN TEXAS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS YET ANOTHER PATIENT THAT WAS DISMISSED.
STILL TRYING TO GET THE NEW LAW LANGUAGE FROM CMS, BARRING NON VIOLENT PATEINTS FROM GETTING KICKED OUT. SO FAR CMS WILL NOT POST THE NEW LAW OR ITS LANGUAGE.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 282
Posted: 03 Sep 2009 20:40 Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm trying to be surprised.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 6:21 am Post subject:
I've posted at some of the other boards about what is going on, the more eyes on this - the better.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 4:26 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great news! The patient in Texas has been assigned to a clinic and will be receiving dialysis on a regular basis. When I talked to the patient on the phone, I was told the patient was accused of clamping a line and causing air to back up into the machine - patient talked to manufacturer and manufacturer said that couldn't happen. Also the doctor expressed dismay that the patient wasn't reaching dry weight - patient says this was due to weight gain. We can be happy a tragedy has been avoided.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:48 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After making darn sure the Texas patient is safe and secure, it is now time to turn our attention to the person most responsible for this near tragedy. In all the time I've been with DialysisEthics, I can't recall a time when a doctor has drawn such special consideration as to be named on our board, but now is the time:
Dr. JACK WESLY MONCRIEF
It takes a lot to draw the ire of the Texas Medical Board, but Dr. Moncrief managed to accomplish that task. We have to ask why DaVita would make such a person a Medical Director? Were the ESRD networks aware of this? Did CMS know about this? This would be a good thing to see on Dialysis Facility Compare.
************************************************************
What we are finding:
PUBLIC VERIFICATION / PHYSICIAN PROFILE
PHYSICIAN INFORMATION
NAME: JACK WESLY MONCRIEF MD DATE: 09/15/2009
THE INFORMATION IN THIS BOX HAS BEEN VERIFIED
BY THE TEXAS MEDICAL BOARD
Date of Birth: 1936
License Number: D0234 -- Physician License
Issuance Date: 08/18/1962
Expiration Date of Physician
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:51 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investigations by TMB of Medical Malpractice
Section 164.201 of the Act requires that: the board review information relating to a physician against whom three or more malpractice claims have been reported within a five year period. Based on these reviews, the following investigations were conducted with the listed resolutions.
NONE
Status History
Status history contains entries for any updates to the individual
-
Angieskidney
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 28
Location: ON, Canada
Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:03 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh wow! It is a good thing that you guys looked into this! Scary! :o
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:08 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is amazing, I will say the patient couldn't have picked a better time to come to us.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:36 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some seem to feel we are going after a doctor's reputation without a fair hearing, however a non-violent patient's life was put in jeopardy - where was the patient's hearing?
We don't take these matters lightly, we believe what we have done is warranted and are prepared to deal with any fallout.
-
Angieskidney
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 28
Location: ON, Canada
Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:57 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some seem to feel we are going after a doctor's reputation without a fair hearing, however a non-violent patient's life was put in jeopardy - where was the patient's hearing?
We don't take these matters lightly, we believe what we have done is warranted and are prepared to deal with any fallout.
Doesn't surprise me that people might see it that way with what I have heard about how things turns out at ratemds.com ..
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:34 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We put up what is public record - would give me a reason for concern if I was shopping for a clinic.
I'm lucky I have such great mentors! I can see how easy it is to cross over into libel. Sounds like what might be happening at ratemds?
-
Angieskidney
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 28
Location: ON, Canada
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 10:16 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We put up what is public record - would give me a reason for concern if I was shopping for a clinic.
I'm lucky I have such great mentors! I can see how easy it is to cross over into libel. Sounds like what might be happening at ratemds?
Not sure. I know I value the input at ratemds and haven't found anything bad. I have checked out 4 of my doctors and each seem really accurate. The best doctor I have ever had .. sure enough .. ranks real high there and has had a LOT of people say so. The doctor I currently have which I don't like has mixed reviews and the doctor I had just before this one which I also didn't like from the same office had a lot of bad reviews. So to me it seems like ratemds is GOOD but that doctors do not like getting less clients because now the information is easier to find.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:23 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll have to bookmark that!
-
Dialysis Crusader
Joined: 01 Oct 2009
Posts: 4
Location: Texas
Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:32 pm Post subject: rating doctors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is so important that Doctors are rated for other patients and help prevent patients from getting hurt. I for one had no idea my doctor was less than adequate and had been in trouble with the State.
Poor doctors equal poor employees and poor service. I know first hand.
-
plugger
Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 283
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:27 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It does filter down.
-
Angieskidney
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 28
Location: ON, Canada
Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:58 am Post subject: Re: rating doctors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah exactly! They got lawyers and regulations ... so why is it so wrong if we have sites that rate doctors so that we can protect ourselves?
-
I talked to Abby yesterday. She loves her clinic and her life. She still has a bit of trama over the incident of the dismissal.
She is such a trooper.
-
Good to hear! She seems like quite a lady!