Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted December 3, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 3, 2012 Perhaps we could make the argument to get rid of supervision with this. Court upholds ruling that UVM clinic director not liable for physician assistant’s actions 8:40 AM, Nov 29, 2012 Written by Sam Hemingway Free Press Staff Writer A University of Vermont student health clinic director was not legally liable for the actions of a physician assistant who over-prescribed opiate medications to 12 students in 2008 and 2009, the Vermont Supreme Court has ruled. The court’s 5-0 decision affirms a Jan. 11 ruling by the state Medical Practice Board that largely exonerated Dr. Jon Porter, director of UVM’s Center for Health and Wellbeing, regarding his oversight of Peter Nobes, a long-time physician’s assistant with the center. “We conclude that it would not, in fact, have been within the Board’s authority to discipline Dr. Porter ... based solely upon the PA’s unprofessional acts,” the court’s Nov. 9 decision said. “(The law) provides no basis for disciplining a supervising physician whose PA has committed an unprofessional act where the supervising physician has met or exceeded all standards of care.” Porter underwent several days of hearings before a three-member Medical Practice Board panel in 2011 defending himself against a seven-count “specification of charges” document that alleged he was liable for Nobes’ conduct because he failed to adequately supervise him. The panel recommended that Porter be found guilty of one unprofessional misconduct charge but the full board disagreed and in January cleared him of all charges. The board’s decision was appealed to the state Supreme Court by the Attorney General’s Office. Nobes, in a separate action, was disciplined in 2010 after admitting he prescribed opiate medications to some students without an in-office visit or physical examination and, in one case, refilling a prescription for a student who claimed his medications were lost or stolen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsfelder0417 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I don't know if I want to completely get rid of association with a physician. I simply don't feel like I have all the angles covered, but then again i'm still a student, and I still have a lot to learn. There are probably those that have been in practice for years that would excel independently. I agree that the term 'supervision' is not fitting, however. I could go for 'collaboration.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdtpac Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Statement like this is why students should stay on student forms. The PA was wrong! If the medical board would start taking a deeper look into this situation they probably will find out that this is been going on for a long time and what we have here is a corrupt PA. Giving opiates to students without documenting an office visit or physical exam, saying that the student "lost or someone stole" their prescription, come on give me a break these are all the kinds of things that signal a PA that is either dealing or has a drug problem himself. This is why we have impaired practitioner committees in our state organizations that are mandated by state regulations. It is estimated that as many as 10-15% of all health care providers are impaired and PAs are no exception. This is not a subject to take lightly, I have had to deal with this issue of impairment with some very close friends, fortunately none of them broke the law. Because of my capacity as governmental affairs chair for my state organization I have been called for depositions on cases exactly like this and had to agree with law enforcement that the supervising physician should not be held liable for the action of a PA for doing the exact same thing that this PA has done. Oneal I can't believe how you can even associate detaching ourselves from supervision as it relates to this PAs actions. You should concentrate on your studies and worry about getting out of PA school before you start worrying about changing PA practice, which I'm beginning to see you have very little understanding about.sorry son at your way off base on this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsfelder0417 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 The PA was wrong, and sounds like a hustler. I agree that the SP should not be hit for what the PA does. I do think, however, that anyone- Pre-PA, PA-S, PA-C or SP should browse the forums simply to be aware of what is happening in the clinical world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAdamsPAC Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 A good decision on the court's part. I want MORE PAs who are loose with the narcs to be smacked down and smacked very hard across this nation. This level of behavior is almost a norm in some areas and is a true threat to our profession.The fixation to write for narcotics for every ache and pain or anxiolytics for life issues by so many providers is repugnant to me. We collectively, cannot accept or tolerate this mis-practice by our peers as it reflects poorly on all of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 This case makes a big statement about the nature of SP-PA relations and what supervision and liability mean. It is a precedent for loosening physician's fears about employing PAs. And perhaps some larger implications for dependent practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.