Scandal at Yale. Fertility Clinic Nurse Stole Fentanyl. Patients Received Saline.

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

A riveting podcast series (The Retrievals) highlights the stories of women who visited the prestigious Yale Fertility Clinic. Their allegations. For egg retrieval procedures, they received saline instead of fentanyl for pain.

The vials said fentanyl. Unbeknownst to everyone, a nurse was feeding her own habit, leaving the vials with no active ingredient.

When the egg retrieval procedures were performed, the patients had less sedation/analgesia than most dental procedures.

Yale settled with the Department of Justice. And lawsuits now abound.

Egg retrieval is not a particularly complicated procedure. With ultrasound guidance, a needle pierces the vaginal wall to access the ovaries. The eggs are removed by gentle suction. The procedure is described as relatively painless “and takes 20 to 30 minutes under twilight anesthesia.”

Relatively painless.

Not so at Yale.

In ‘The Retrievals’, a dozen victims describe feeling ‘gut-wrenching pain’ during the procedure; many had asked for more medication, but all were told that they had already been administered the maximum dosage. 

‘It was bad instantly,’ says a woman named Leah. ‘And it shouldn’t really be bad instantly, like you shouldn’t wake up and be in horrific nightmarish pain. But I woke up and it felt like someone had been inside me and gutted me.’ 

‘It was like someone had been inside me, scraped me hollow, and it was burning.’ 

Another patient, Laura says, ‘I remember thrusting my hips up and saying, “I feel everything!”‘

After the procedure, one patient texted her sister-in-law, baffled, and told her: ‘I could drive myself home right now, I’m that alert.’ 

“I was thrusting my hips and telling these people, like wide awake speaking to them, “I feel everything you’re doing!”‘

‘I just remember texting them that it’s hard to believe that we have a fentanyl epidemic where people are addicted because it did nothing to me.’ 

And on and on.

As many as 200 patients were alleged to have received saline, instead of fentanyl. The patients were told they’d be receiving midazolam for drowsiness, and fentanyl for pain.

Over a five-month period, Donna Monticone, a nurse at the clinic was stealing fentanyl and replacing it with saline.

In October 2020, after months of patients complaining that they suffered unimaginable pain during their surgeries, an anesthesiologist working at the clinic noticed that a cap came off a vial fentanyl too easily.

Within three days, Donna Monticone was questioned by authorities and denied taking the fentanyl at first. She later came clean when her drug test came back positive. 

She confessed to stealing vials of fentanyl from the storage room and injecting herself in the bathroom at work up to four times a day. Then she took the empty canisters home to fill them with saline solution, she swears that she used a clean needle every time.

She estimated that she tampered with 75 per cent of the fentanyl given to patients at the clinic. Some of the vials contained pure saline and some were a mix.

Monticone lost her job. The Department of Justice (DOJ) was notified. DOJ sent letters to ~200 patients explaining they were potential victims in a federal case.

Lawyers for plaintiffs believe the number of affected patients is even higher.

As for Monticone, she was a divorced mother of three in a custody battle with her ex-husband.

‘I was overwhelmed by the sense that I would never be free,’ said Monticone in court records. ‘That I would have to take more time off of work, find more money to pay the lawyer and engage in yet more litigation, I suddenly couldn’t see or think straight anymore.’

It was around this time that she resorted to stealing drugs from the clinic.

Monticone’s sentence was much more lenient than you’d expect.

Monticone was sentenced to just four weekends in jail instead of a recommended five year jail sentence.

U.S. District Court Judge Janet C. Hall also sentenced her to three months of home confinement and three years of supervised release.

The civil case against Yale is gathering steam. And whether Yale’s Fertility Center will be able to re-establish its reputation remains to be seen.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.

HIPAA and Abortions

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

 

Some updates to HIPAA may be around the corner.

Let’s start with the status quo.

The current Privacy Rule permits, but does not require, covered entities to disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials without the patient’s written authorization. In the wake of the Supreme Court Dobbs decision, the legality of abortion is now a province of state law. States may adopt permissive or restrictive laws regarding abortion.

Every state is different.

What happens if a patient lives in a state where access to abortion (after a particular gestation period) is illegal and travels to a different state where that abortion is legal? If law enforcement wants to investigate, what are healthcare providers obligated to do? Allowed to do?

Currently, the healthcare institution in the permissive state could disclose the patient’s abortion to law enforcement investigating in the restrictive state. This institution would not be obligated to disclose, but they could disclose without the patient’s signed authorization.

Why might an institution in a permissive state do that? Well, not every person in a permissive state believes as the state does. It might seem unusual that an institution would perform the abortion, and then turn that person’s records over to law enforcement in another state when they didn’t have to. But this should not seem strange. Do you believe that 100% of the people at your institution believe the same things and act the same way? They don’t.

Anyway, the Department of Health & Human Services was directed to update HIPAA via Notice of Proposed Rule Making. This Notice means that an updated Rule is being considered, and those interested may submit comments.

Covered Entities would be prohibited from disclosing Protected Health Information (PHI) when delivery of reproductive healthcare falls within at least one of three sets of circumstances:

(1) The reproductive care is provided outside the state where the investigation or proceeding is authorized and where such healthcare is lawfully provided (e.g., if a resident of one state traveled to another state to receive reproductive healthcare, such as an abortion, that is lawful in the state where such healthcare was provided).

(2) The reproductive care is protected, required, or authorized by federal law, regardless of the state in which such healthcare is provided (e.g., if reproductive healthcare, such as miscarriage management, is required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act to stabilize the health of the pregnant person).

(3) The reproductive care is provided in the state in which the investigation or proceeding is authorized and the care provided is permitted by the law of that state (e.g., if a resident of a state received reproductive healthcare, such as a pregnancy test or treatment for an ectopic pregnancy, in the state where the individual resides, and that reproductive healthcare is lawful in that state).

By the way, “reproductive health care” is not limited solely to abortion. It is broadly defined to include (but not be limited to), prenatal care, abortion, miscarriage management, infertility treatment, contraception use, and treatment of reproductive-related conditions such as ovarian cancer.

It’s not a done deal yet. HHS suggests once the updated Rule is finalized (and the Notice of Proposed Rule Making has run its course), all affected covered entities would at least need to adopt or alter some existing policies and procedures, enhance the security of any IT system that contains PHI, retrain certain employees on the new requirements, and revise certain business associate agreements that may be affected by the Rule.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

 

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.

Ethical Conundrums: The Case of the Mature Minor

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

In the US, ages 18 and 21 are legal markers. Voting, drinking, serving in the military, buying a gun. A birthday changes rights, responsibilities, and obligations.

Medscape recently posted a case: A Teenage Girl Refuses More Cancer Treatment; Her Father Disagrees.

Here, the patient was a young woman, age 17.

She was diagnosed with osteosarcoma at age 9. She experienced half her life with a diagnosis of osteosarcoma.

The vignette stated, “she had received chemotherapy and had been under that treatment for a while.”

It was not clear if she had had prior surgery. But the story continued that initially her chemotherapy worked.

Given that this story was titled ethical conundrum, you can assume her cancer recurred. And it did.

She went to school and enjoyed sports. She was a real fan of softball and tried to manage the team and be involved. …she was planning to go to college. Her love of softball remained, but given the recurrence of the cancer, she had no chance to pursue her athletic interests, not only as a player, but also as a manager or even as a coach for younger players. That was all off the table.

Apparently, once her cancer recurred, standard treatments were off the table. The story did not provide details as to what type of recurrence was identified. Presumably systemic spread. No mention was made of surgery. And conventional chemotherapy was not an option; only an “experimental protocol.”

Again, unclear if “experimental protocol” meant a drug that was approved for different indications, or whether it was a novel medication in early clinical trials, and, if so, how far along was the drug in such trials. Phase 2? Phase 3?

Anyway, the 17-year-old drew a line in the sand. She said it was her body, her Choice. She had had enough.

She said to her family and the doctors that she didn’t want to do it. She would rather die. She couldn’t take any more chemotherapy and she certainly didn’t want to do it if it was experimental, with the outcomes of this intervention being uncertain.

Mom and Dad were not in line with their daughter.

Her dad said, “She can’t decide. She’s a minor. She’s only 17. I want you to do it — administer this novel form of chemotherapy and try to save her.” Her mother said, “Her input matters. I want to listen to her.” Her mom wasn’t as adamant about doing it or not, but she really felt that [the daughter] should be heard loudly because she felt she was mature enough or old enough, even though a minor, to really have a position about what it is to undergo chemotherapy.

An ethics consult was obtained. A social worker was brought in to discuss the case. The family had strong religious convictions, and their pastor was also brought in to discuss. The family discussed the case with all parties.

Here’s what the young girl wanted. Beyond no additional treatment.

What she wanted was to go to her prom. She wanted to get to her sister’s junior high school softball championship game. 

Modest goals. But important goals to HER.

Ultimately, an agreement was reached that she would not undergo the experimental intervention. [All] agreed on a course of palliative care, recommended that as what the doctors follow, and they decided to do so. Sadly, [the daughter] died. She died at home. She did make it to her prom.

These are tough decisions. And each patient and each family are different. While this girl was technically a minor, she had lived with osteosarcoma for years. She would soon be age 18, if she lived that long. It seemed futile to provide chemotherapy, with its attendant side effects, which might allow her to live to age 18, only getting her to the point where she could legally withdraw further treatment.

If a judge has been forced to decide, it’s not clear how this would have gone. Ultimately, guardian ad litem would be assigned to look after the child’s interests. But given that the protocol was experimental with an uncertain outcome, a judge may very well have ruled for the daughter.

This is different than cases where a Jehovah’s Witness parent refuses to allow their minor child to receive a blood transfusion for an urgent procedure, one potentially associated with significant blood loss. There, the judge will almost always rule that the medical team CAN transfuse the patient.  

Cases like these define why medicine in the real world can be difficult.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.

Don’t Do This

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

As physicians, if you suspect child abuse, you are mandated to report to the appropriate authorities, such as Child Protective Services (CPS). In Texas, where our vignette played out, professionals are beholden to the following law.

Section 261.101 of the Texas Family Code mandates that anyone who suspects child abuse or neglect must report it immediately. The report may be made to (1) any local or state law enforcement agency; or (2) the Department of Family and Protective Services.

All persons are required to make the report immediately, and individuals who are licensed or certified by the state or who work for an agency or facility licensed or certified by the state and have contact with children as a result of their normal duties, such as teachers, nurses, doctors, and day-care employees, must report the abuse or neglect within 48 hours.

Deric Cahill took his toddler to an urgent care center in Dallas. He alleged the doctor turned him into CPS for leaving a one-star Google review. In other words, the doctor weaponized the duty to report because of a nasty review.

The Cahill family is a content creator for Instagram and TikTok with 750,000 followers. What followed, predictably, did not go well for the physician.

To state the obvious, what follows are only allegations. As to whether the doctor believed, in good faith, she suspected abuse and HAD to report, is unknown.

And in Texas:

A person acting in good faith who reports or assists in the investigation of a report of child abuse or neglect is immune from civil or criminal liability. Failure to report suspected child abuse or neglect is a Class A Misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment of up to one year and/or a fine of up to $4,000. Merely reporting the incident to a supervisor or manager is insufficient.  

The incentive TO report based on reasonable suspicion is high. The penalty for NOT reporting is steep.

Back to the urgent care center.

Cahill’s toddler had a fever for several days. He called a nurse’s hotline. He then took the child to pediatric urgent care center.

Cahill says the physician checked his ears, nose, and throat and listened to his breathing.  After a few minutes, Cahill says the doctor told them that his fever could have been caused by anything and recommended they visit the emergency room to get blood work, urinalysis, and other tests to rule everything out. Cahill says he and his wife sat in stunned silence after the doctor’s recommendation and were surprised the provider hadn’t asked them more questions. After the doctor repeated her recommendation, Cahill said he wasn’t happy with how the appointment went and left.

Miffed, Cahill wrote his online review in the parking lot.

“This is the most transactional experience I’ve ever had with a caregiver. We brought our son in with a fever, and after five minutes of normal tests: check ears, check throat. The doctor tells us to just go to the hospital to get urine, blood, and x-rays to figure out if it’s pneumonia, UTI, or some other infection. Bring your kid here if you just need antibiotics…anything else, it’s a waste of time and money.”

And, he emailed the corporate office for the urgent care center to express his displeasure. He wanted a refund for the perceived lack of service.

Within two hours of leaving the urgent care center, a report was filed to CPS about a severely dehydrated child. Within one hour of filing, a CPS officer showed up at the Cahill’s house.

Cahill says the case worker told him she expected to see a severely ill child but left after 30 minutes of sitting, talking with the family, and observing [the child].

Cahill went back to the urgent care center to speak with the physician about the CPS report. He received the records related to dehydration, but was instructed to wait outside. Meanwhile the staff called the police. All of this was documented in a TikTok video.

After speaking with the police and learning that the provider would not speak with him, he left with his child’s paperwork.

For Cahill, there is a clear connection between his critique of the care and the CPS report. “Why would she wait an hour and a half to call CPS if she was so concerned? Why wouldn’t she follow up with us to ask if we followed the guidance?” Cahill says. “It feels malicious.”

After the CPS visit, the family took the toddler to their usual urgent care, where Cahill says the provider spent 30 minutes with the family and asked more questions. The record of the appointment describes a very different toddler. Rather than “sick looking, weak cry” in the first visit, the second report describes a child that is “alert, pleasant, well-nourished and in no acute distress.” The provider told them to monitor their son, and his fever broke for good that night.

“Based on everything we experienced that day, the only thing I am led to believe is that this doctor was offended that I called her out in her office, that I left a Google review, that I emailed her senior leadership team, and she retaliated against us by weaponizing her position and calling CPS,” he said in a video post.

Cahill filed complaints with the Texas Medical Board and Texas Attorney General Consumer Services Division. In Texas, falsely reporting child abuse with the intent to deceive is a felony. Still, given the incentives to report and penalties for not reporting, I doubt criminal penalties will be imposed.

CPS cases move slowly.

The CPS case isn’t closed yet, but Cahill says the case manager told them she has no concerns and is working on character references to end the investigation. In a conversation with [the] Urgent Care management, Cahill reported that the organization said it would explore ways to improve its policies and that providers are bound by mandatory reporting standards. 

Cahill is a man on a mission.

“Money is not my motive. My motive is to hang this doctor’s license in my bedroom because she will no longer be able to practice medicine. That’s the mission.”

What are the evolving lessons?

      1. Physicians need to understand what their obligations are for reporting suspected child abuse.
      2. The protections from civil and criminal liability apply if the report to authorities is made in good faith and without malice (at least in Texas).
      3. As to whether good faith and without malice apply, reviewers will look to the totality of the circumstances – the facts of the case, the timing of the report, and any extraneous circumstances.
      4. Doctors should be cautious about reporting someone to CPS FOR a one-star Google review. They should report FOR suspected child abuse.
      5. If the timeline suggests the father wrote the online review, and then Google sent an email to the physician about the one-star review, and then this email was opened and read, and then the report to CPS was filed, well, you can draw your own conclusions.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.

Suspended for Unprofessional Behavior – MD with Tourette’s Syndrome

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

An employed physician had a challenging conversation with a family about a patient hell-bent on signing out against medical advice. The physician had been working a very long shift and was slammed left and right with non-stop patients. He was frustrated, stepped back, and under his breath muttered an obscenity. It’s not even clear the family heard the obscenity.

A chief resident did.

He reported the physician. The physician was suspended for five days for “unprofessional behavior.”

The physician has Tourette’s syndrome. He had not disclosed his condition to his colleagues or employer.

Was the hospital within its rights to take action?

First, and importantly, the hospital is not Nostradamus. It cannot presume there is a biological cause for what it labeled as unprofessional behavior. Still, a five-day suspension for an under-the-breath obscenity that the family/patient likely didn’t hear, seems unduly harsh. If physicians were routinely suspended for uttering an occasional obscenity, even in stressful and difficult circumstances, our work force would quickly thin.

Next, Tourette’s syndrome is a spectrum disorder. Each patient manifests symptoms differently.

Symptoms vary from person to person and can range from mild to severe. It’s not uncommon for symptoms to change frequency over short time periods or to disappear for extended time periods (wax and wane). Common motor tics include: eye blinking, head jerking and facial movements. Common vocal tics include: throat clearing, sniffing and tongue clicking.

Coprolalia is an extreme and rare case of Tourette often sensationalized by the media. It is the involuntary utterance of obscene and socially unacceptable words and phrases. It is relatively rare in individuals with Tourette (only 10% of those diagnosed have this symptom), is not required for diagnosis, and does not persist in many cases.

While a hospital may not want its staff occasionally uttering an obscenity, the legal calculus may change if Tourette’s is considered a disability covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

For the ADA to be triggered, the hiring entity must have 15 or more employees. And the basic definition of “disability” is an impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record of such an impairment, or being regarded as having such an impairment.

Hospital and healthcare employers may try to terminate an employee with a disability arguing they pose a risk to patients. It’s hard to imagine how occasionally uttering an obscenity would pose a risk to patients. Even then, the analysis does not stop there. If the employer can reasonably accommodate the employee’s disability, they have an obligation to do so. Imagine a scenario where a physician is hearing impaired. The hospital might argue that without sufficient hearing, patients might be placed in harm’s way.  But with a specific accommodation, say a hearing aid, this physician hears reasonably well. In that situation, the employer cannot argue the employee physician is dangerous. With the hearing aid, he isn’t.

Here’s what Congress wrote:

42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(3) specifies that nothing requires an entity to permit an individual to participate in or benefit from the facilities of such entity where that individual poses a direct threat to the health or safety of others. That provision continues to say that the term direct threat means a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policy, practices, or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services. Therefore, it is fair to say that congressional intent includes the safety of others as being necessary.

My friend, Bill Goren, is a nationally recognized disability lawyer. He has written about the standards that apply in fields such as healthcare:

[I]n the licensing field the “ability to practice safely,” arises frequently. This opinion emphatically says that the standard is direct threat and that any threat involving safety requirements must be legitimate safety requirements based upon actual risks and not upon stereotypes.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission writes about “direct threat” as follows.

An employer only may exclude an individual with a … disability from a job for safety reasons when the individual poses a direct threat. A “direct threat” is a significant risk of substantial harm to the individual or others that cannot be eliminated or reduced through reasonable accommodation. An employer should conduct an individualized “direct threat” assessment of an individual’s present ability to safely perform the essential functions of the job. This determination must be based on reasonable medical judgment that relies on the most current medical knowledge and/or on the best available objective evidence. In making a direct threat assessment, the employer must consider:

      • the duration of the risk;
      • the nature and severity of the potential harm;
      • the likelihood that the potential harm will occur; and
      • the imminence of the potential harm.

The harm must be serious and likely to occur, not remote or speculative. Finally, the employer must determine whether any reasonable accommodation would reduce or eliminate the risk.

With that as a backdrop, the Americans with Disabilities Act is not a get out of jail free card to avoid accountability for an employee’s actions. From an ADA lawsuit against a telephone carrier in 1998:

[In Hamilton] we held that an employer was not liable for firing a man with PTSD who had an angry and profane confrontation with his manager even though the episode was arguably caused by his condition. Hamilton v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co., 136 F.3d 1047, 1052–53 (5th Cir. 1998). Though his outburst was arguably caused by his PTSD, it also violated company policy. Id. at 1053. We went on to say that “the ADA does not insulate emotional or violent outbursts blamed on an impairment.” Id.

In another case from the Fifth Circuit:

Another is Seaman. That case involved an employee verbally abusing his supervisor for denying his vacation request. Seaman v. CSPH, Inc., 179 F.3d 297, 298–99 (5th Cir. 1999). The employee suffered from bipolar disorder, and when he was fired for insubordination, he sued. Id. at 298–99. In affirming summary judgment, we said that though the employee’s reaction could have been attributed to his bipolar disorder, he could “not use the ADA as an aegis and thus avoid accountability for his own actions.” Id. at 301.

In yet another case from the Fifth Circuit, an employee with history of sleepwalking had a problem while on a business trip. In the middle of the night, she entered a male co-worker’s room (adjacent to hers) just after midnight, uninvited and wearing only a robe, and got into his bed. She apparently was sleepwalking. She was fired. She sued.

The district court granted summary judgment for NextGen (the employer). The district court concluded that Harkey (the employee) could not establish a prima facie showing of disability discrimination because she “fail[ed] to meet the requirements of proving a disability” and that “she fail[ed] to show evidence that she was subject to an adverse employment decision because of her sleepwalking.” The district court further held that NextGen fired Harkey for “misconduct”—a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason—and that Harkey could not demonstrate that this was pretext.

That Harkey’s “severe, unprofessional, [and] inappropriate” conduct was purportedly caused by her sleepwalking disorder is of no matter. The ADA does not give employees license to act with impunity. See Seaman, 179 F.3d at 300–01; Hamilton, 136 F.3d at 1052. When Harkey sleepwalked into her male coworker’s room in the state that she was in, NextGen had a reason to fire her. So, the ADA is no barrier to her termination. Harkey has not shown she was fired because she had a sleepwalking disorder. She was fired because of what she did when she was sleepwalking.

It’s a wide gulf between terminating a sleepwalking employee for unintentionally jumping into a married man’s bed on a business trip compared with uttering a coprolalic obscenity heard by almost no one. Regarding the opening vignette, will the ADA save the physician’s reputation and career? Maybe.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. We also provide counsel specific to COVID-19. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.

Who is Entitled to be Called Doctor? Round Two.

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

Around one year ago, we blogged about “Who is Entitled to be Called Doctor?

We deciphered California’s existing rule:

Introducing State of California Business and Professions Code §2054
2054. (a) Any person who uses in any sign, business card, or letterhead, or, in an advertisement, the words “doctor” or “physician,” the letters or prefix “Dr.,” the initials “M.D.,” or any other terms or letters indicating or implying that he or she is a physician and surgeon, physician, surgeon, or practitioner under the terms of this or any other law, or that he or she is entitled to practice hereunder, or who represents or holds himself or herself out as a physician and surgeon, physician, surgeon, or practitioner under the terms of this or any other law, without having at the time of so doing a valid, unrevoked, and unsuspended certificate as a physician and surgeon under this chapter, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), any of the following persons may use the words “doctor” or “physician,” the letters or prefix “Dr.,” or the initials “M.D.”:

(1) A graduate of a medical school approved or recognized by the board while enrolled in a postgraduate training program approved by the board.

(2) A graduate of a medical school who does not have a certificate as a physician and surgeon under this chapter if he or she meets all of the following requirements:

(A) If issued a license to practice medicine in any jurisdiction, has not had that license revoked or suspended by that jurisdiction.

(B) Does not otherwise hold himself or herself out as a physician and surgeon entitled to practice medicine in this state except to the extent authorized by this chapter.

(C) Does not engage in any of the acts prohibited by Section 2060.

(3) A person authorized to practice medicine under Section 2111 or 2113 subject to the limitations set forth in those sections.

What does this mean without the legalese?

1. You either need to have an active license or be covered by an exception.

2. One exception is if you are licensed in another state (or even another country) and you do not represent yourself as someone practicing medicine in California.

3. But if you are not licensed in another state (or even another country) or not in an approved postgraduate medical school program, you are at risk for being charged with a misdemeanor.

What a difference a year makes…

In November 2022, California District Atty reached a settlement with a California nurse practitioner, Sarah Erny. She also holds a doctorate degree in nursing practice.

Sarah Erny, R.N., N.P., earned a doctorate degree in nursing practice. Shortly thereafter, she began promoting herself as “Doctor Sarah Erny.” From October2018 until March 2022, Ms. Erny hosted a professional website and was active on various social media accounts wherein she identified herself as “Dr. Sarah Erny.” While in most instances Ms. Erny indicated that she was a nurse practitioner, she failed to advise the public that she was not a medical doctor and failed to identify her supervising physician. Adding to the lack of clarity caused by referring to herself as “Dr. Sarah,” online search results would list “Dr. Sarah Erny,” without any mention of Ms. Erny’s nurse status.

The civil judgment requires Ms. Erny to pay civil penalties totaling $19,750 and to refrain from referring to herself as “doctor” in her role of providing medical treatment to the public. It also requires Ms. Erny to identify and make reasonable efforts to correct information on internet sites referring to her as “doctor” or “Dr.”

So, while Sara Erny holds a doctorate in nursing, the state mandated she pay ~$20k in fines and muzzle herself – never labeling herself as doctor in her care of patients.

News of Erny’s prosecution spread faster than a California wildfire among the nursing community.

Three California NPs, who also hold doctorate degrees in nursing, just filed a lawsuit against the California Attorney General and the Medical Board of California seeking Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. They want to be able to be called doctor and not run afoul of California Business and Professions Code §2054(a).

The three NPs are:

(a) Jacqueline Palmer. She earned a doctorate in nursing practice in 2020.

(b) Heather Lewis. She earned a doctorate in nursing practice in 2023.

(c) Rodolfo Jaravata-Hanson. He earned a doctorate in nursing practice in 2023.

As alleged in the lawsuit, “Defendant’s Actions Chill Plaintiffs’ Speech:

News of the actions against Dr. Erny appeared in the media, where Plaintiffs learned about them. As Doctors of Nursing Practice who have used, use, or intend to use the title “Dr.” in their practice and on websites and social media, Plaintiffs fear that Defendants will take action against them similar to those taken against Dr. Erny.

At the family practice clinic where she serves primary care clientele, Dr. Palmer’s colleagues, including physicians, have never expressed concerns that she is referred to as “Dr. Palmer, FNP.” When she interacts with her patients at the clinic, she explains that she is a Nurse Practitioner and not a physician. Dr. Palmer’s clinician’s jacket has her name embroidered with “Dr. J. Palmer, FNP-C.” She has signed her name using “Dr.” and qualified with “FNP” on official clinic documents.

Dr. Palmer has never misrepresented to anyone, directly or indirectly, that she is a physician, nor have her patients or physician colleagues mistaken her for a physician.

Since learning about Defendants’ actions against Dr. Erny, Dr. Palmer no longer signs her name with the title “Dr.” She has hung up her clinician’s jacket embroidered with “Dr. J. Palmer, FNP-C” on the front. She has asked others in the clinic not to refer to her as “Dr.” and has refrained from referring to herself that way. Dr. Palmer fears that Defendants will open an enforcement action against her.

A recent DNP graduate, Heather Lewis intends to change her business cards, office name plate, and scrubs to accurately reflect her latest accomplishments, specifically to read “Dr. Heather Lewis, FNP-C, DNP.” On social media, Dr. Lewis truthfully describes herself as “Dr. Heather Lewis, FNP-C, DNP.”

Since learning about Defendants’ actions against Dr. Erny, Dr. Lewis now fears that Defendants may open an enforcement action against her.

The three NPs are alleging a violation of their First Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech. They want California Business and Professions Code §2054 declared unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution.

If they win, Dr. Phil, Dr. Dre, and Dr. Jill Biden will be able to rest easy.

What do you think?

Medical Justice provides free consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a free consultation – or use the tool shared below.

"Can Medical Justice solve my problem?" Click here to review recent consultations...

We’ve been protecting doctors from medico-legal threats since 2001. We’ve seen it all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…

  • Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
  • Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
  • Just received board complaint…
  • Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
  • Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
  • DEA showed up to my office…
  • Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
  • My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
  • My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
  • How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
  • How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
  • I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
  • Hospital wants to fire me…
  • Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
  • Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
  • Patient’s results are not what was expected…
  • Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
  • Just received notice of intent to sue…
  • Just received summons for meritless case…
  • Safely responding to negative online reviews…

We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.

Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD

Chief Executive Officer and Founder

Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.

Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.

Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.

In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.

Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With over 50 combined years of experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.