Blog

 
     

Recent Study Highlights Weakness in Patient Protection Policies

By Michael Klazema on 11/23/2016

In a recent report, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution looked at nationwide policies for protecting patients from doctors who have been accused or convicted of sexual abuse. The study looked at policies in every state in the country (plus Washington D.C.), assessing how the different states discipline doctors who have had sexual abuse allegations brought against them. The study assigned a letter grade to each state along with a numerical score out of 100.

This state-by-state report card is the latest in an Atlanta Journal-Constitution series started in July. The series has examined sex abuse in the healthcare sector and disciplinary standards for doctors who commit crimes. You can find the complete series here.

The comprehensive report card broke down the grading scale into five different categories, including:

  • Transparency: Did patients have access to adequate information about physician discipline? This category looked at patients' ability to learn about the doctors treating them.
  • Duty-to-Report Laws: Some states require hospitals or institutions to report information about physician misconduct and discipline to the state board. These requirements are called duty-to-report laws. Colleagues (other doctors on staff) are also duty-bound to report misconduct under such laws.
  • Board composition: State medical boards made up of all doctors tend to "take pity" on physicians charged with misconduct compared to boards comprised of consumers. Similarly, medical boards made up of all males are more likely to go easy on a male doctor accused of sexually abusing female patients. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution was looking for boards more evenly split between women and men or medical professionals and consumers.
  • Criminal acts: Some hospitals take care of discipline in-house and do not let the charges escalate. This category looked at state-by-state policies for informing law enforcement and medical regulators about sex abuse allegations.
  • Discipline laws: How do states punish doctors who have been accused of sexual misconduct? Do they allow them to keep practicing? Do they revoke their licenses? Do they monitor them more closely? This category looked at state laws for handling "problem physicians."

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution graded each of these categories on a 0 to 100 scale. The newspaper then averaged out those scores into an overall grade. Only one state—Delaware—scored above a 90 in the overall category. Texas landed in second place with an 80, while only three other states (Minnesota, California, and Maryland) scored about 70. Every other state scored 69 or below, with Mississippi ranking at the bottom of the list with a score of 37.

Delaware topped the report card thanks largely to its score of 100 in the "duty-to-report laws" category. The Journal-Constitution praised Texas for requiring all doctors to "undergo rigorous criminal background checks before they're licensed and while they're practicing." However, the report also criticized background check policies across the country, noting that 14 states don't require licensing-level background checks for physicians. In those states, the responsibility of background checks falls to the individual hospitals. However, once licensed, doctors can prescribe drugs or go into private practice, coverage explained. The Journal-Constitution noted that these doctors aren't barred in any way from positions in which they can "ask patients to strip down and submit to being touched."

Per the report, last year, Maryland—a top-five grade recipient on the Journal-Constitution credit card—added background checks at the licensing step for physicians. The state made that overhaul to the process after discovering that it had licensed a doctor who was a convicted rapist.

Sources:

http://doctors.ajc.com/doctors_states_laws/?ecmp=doctorssexabuse_microsite_stories

http://doctors.ajc.com/states/


Tag Cloud
Categories
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • July 17 — Hourly Employee Screening: What Makes It Unique and Important infographic?Modern employers conduct background checks on most of the people they hire. These checks are most often used to screen full-time salaried workers. Part-timers and hourly employees are typically less likely to face a thorough background check or even go through a background screening at all. According to a survey conducted by HR.com, 67 percent of employers screen all of their part-time employees, compared to 83 percent of their full-time employees.
  • July 17 A Kentucky school district recently decided to stop paying for volunteer background checks. Going forward, volunteers will be expected to cover the cost of their own checks, which is $10 per person.
  • July 12 Seeking fresh employees for businesses, some states seek to reduce the number of people denied employment based on old or nonviolent crimes.
  • July 11 Multinational aerospace company - Safran Group - trusts backgroundchecks.com to screen new hires, The products they manufacture can have major implications for aircraft safety and worldwide security. As such, the company needs to be extremely careful and deliberate about who it trusts to join the organization.
  • July 11 Recently cited for driving too fast? Here’s what a speeding ticket will do to your background check report.
  • July 10

    Could your business be vulnerable to employee theft? Protect yourself with more thorough background checks.


  • July 09 While Social Security Numbers aren’t required for criminal history checks, they can be beneficial. Here’s why.
  • July 05

    In June, Chicago Public Schools came under fire after a Chicago Tribune piece accused the district of not protecting students from sexual abusers. The district has announced plans to run background checks on all employees.


  • July 04 — How important are volunteer background checks? Do they even matter?
    Organizations that rely in part on volunteer labor consistently find themselves asking these questions. The assumption is usually that volunteer background checks are less important than background checks for full-time or part-time employees. According to a CareerBuilder survey from 2016, 72 percent of employers conduct background checks on all employees. A parallel statistic isn’t even available for volunteer checks. They are less common – and less valued.
  • July 03 #MeToo harassment allegations continue to reshape workplaces in every industry. As a result, many companies are looking to safeguard themselves from liability.