Posts Tagged With: good faith

Excerpt: “Dr. Mangino has been unjustly prosecuted and convicted in Pennsylvania. His case is unusual. He is currently incarcerated at SCI-Cresson… Essentially, in PA and nationwide, if this conviction is allowed to stand on the grounds presented by prosecution, then any single opioid prescription can be deemed illegal.” — Dr. Mangino

This Resource Is an article by Dr. Frank Fisher published in the Harvard Medical Alumni Bulletin. He recounts his tale of persecution for practicing excellent pain management – a quintessencial example of the War on Doctors and the Pain Crisis in America.

Article from Yakima Herald Journal (Washington state) about Dr. Rosa Martinez who was found not guilty of drug charges in Federal prosecution in December 2007; Dr. Martinez continues to fight for her professional life, and for her patients.

Blog post about: Dr. William Mangino remains incarcerated awaiting sentencing which is scheduled for August 8th in Newcastle, PA. Contact information: 1) Address to write to Mangio in jail provided; 2) address and instructions to contribute to Mangino Defense Fund provided. In my next post on the Mangio case, I want to consider in more depth issues raised by the defense’s Omnibus Motion, entitled, Motion For a Directed Verdict of Not Guilty Or In the Alternative, Request For Additional Jury Instructions, especially the section of that document that addresses the Jury Instructions given at trial.

Blog post about the Prescription Drug Diversion Prosecutions – Quick Reference Card 2002 for which a link to full text PDF is provided. Tina Rosenberg, in her recent cover story for the New York Times Magazine, makes direct reference to the Cheat Sheet in the following paragraphs excerpted from that article. It really is fascinating in a stomach-turning sort of way. Enjoy!

First of a series of blog posts regarding the trial of pain doctor William Mangino. Excerpt: “The prosecution asked only one question on cross examination of defense expert Dr. Tennant. The prosecution brought forth no further expert testimony. The defense felt Tennant’s testimony was sufficiently strong and his credibility and professional stature so huge relative to the prosecution expert, and that the prosecution had failed to make it’s case. And so on 2007-07-03, the defense choose not to call it’s second defense expert (myself) and choose not to put Dr. Mangino on the stand, and rested.”

Innuendo and an ‘investigation’ is all it takes to ruin a doc and cause the abandonment of his patients… Dr. Naramore is obviously no media neophyte, and he gets several important points across very effectively in the article: “The undertreatment of pain is a serious problem in America,” he said. “Physicians are afraid of persecution and prosecution for adequately treating pain. No American should suffer pain.”

Press release from the Pain Relief Network Re: moral victory in St. Thomas in the case of Dr. Maynard, who was sentenced to 7 months which was less than sentencing guidelines.

Blog post about ongoing excellent journalistic coverage of retrial of Dr. William Hurwitz on drug trafficking charges. Lots of links by Szalavitz, Balko, Tierney and to Ken Moore’s recent Pain Doctor’s Trial, and to collections of related resources including reader comments in response to Hurwitz coverage.

Letter from the Hurwitz family to the Pain Relief advocacy community reviewing Dr. Hurwitz’ retrial in great detail, noting the excellent work of their pro bono attorneys Sauber and Rollins and their offices.

More observations from Hurwitz retrial watcher Mary Baluss, Esp. Here Mary describes in greater detail the discussion between judge and prosecutors immediately after the Verdict was rendered by the jury.

Mary Baluss, Esq., gives a quick rundown of the charges Dr. Hurwitz was found guilty of, those not guilty, and those charges dismissed.

Brief excerpt and link to full text of John Tierney blog entry regarding the verdict in the retrial of Dr. William Hurwitz. “One of the jurors left the courthouse in tears, and others whom I talked to said it had been a wrenching decision for all of them because they believed Dr. Hurwitz was a compassionate doctor.”

Excerpt: “Bill Hurwitz thought he had an ‘understanding’ with the authorities, he thought, not only was he being totally above board about what he was doing, and apparently told lots of people like me and these people, but he also thought that the authorities were responsibly monitoring his practice as per agreement in a sort of defacto partnership. I think Billy saw his work in part as a demonstration project – an working model of what the Pain societies and ASAM taught in the 90′s (and still do) – a sort of supervised, real life, proof-of-concept study of outpatient chronic …

Blog entry regarding another in a series of articles by New York Times journalist John Tierney about the re-trial of Dr. William Hurwitz. This is my favorite Tierney-on-Hurwitz yet. This one is not so much about the law or courtroom tactics. This one is about people who hurt; bad. About desperate people; dying people. And about the doctor who wasn’t afraid to welcome them; who wasn’t afraid to try and help.

Comment in response to a TierneyLab blog post. Excerpt: “So, regarding the medical treatment of pain in America, we have the deeply disturbing situation that what most doctors do is at odds with and below the ‘standard of care.’ Literally, in the treatment of chronic pain, an ethical physician attempting to practice in good faith how the textbooks say you should practice IS AN OUTLIER, deviating from what most reputable physicians would do.”

Excerpt from Mary Baluss, courtroom observer: “They were given the standard “good faith” instruction which I don’t like since it talks about the honest exercise of “best” professional judgment. But they were also clearly and carefully instructed about the difference between malpractice and drug distribution. They also got the “willful blindness” (ostrich) instruction and were told that it is possible to determine the requisite scienter (knowingly, wilfully) from that.”

Collection of documents by defense counsel John P. Flannery II, including two appeal briefs filed with the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in support of Dr. Ronald McIver. Siobhan Reynolds comments on the briefs: “Friends, these briefs raise questions of exceptional importance. For nearly a hundred years, the DOJ has manipulated the legal system, using defendants and judges alike as pawns in its effort to acquire by precedent what it could not have gotten had it honored the democratic process. At the Pain Relief Network (PRN) we have been working with attorneys to ‘push back’ since early 2003. These briefs …

Siobhan Reynolds Re: an emergency motion for bail (linked) for Dr. Maynard, and about the failure of corporate civil liberties organizations and human rights groups to support the cause of pain patients and their physicians beset by their government at home.

Impressions of the re-trial of Dr. William Hurwitz by Dr. Alexander DeLuca who witnessed the courtroom proceedings of 2007-04-17, as the trial drew to a close. Excerpt: “Still I was struck, as I always am observing war on docs prosecutions, at how tilted the playing field is, at how much more difficult the defense’s task is. The defense must convince a jury of medical lay people that complicated medical decisions made in very complicated cases were reasonable and well-intended; the prosecution need only sling mud. The former task requires the judge and jury have a medical student level understanding of …