Blog post drawing attention to Radley Balko’s late August article on Fox website which is a very thorough review of this important case in the modern war on doctors. See the Rottschaefer archives linked to above for key legal briefs in addition to high points in the journalistic record. Links to archives on Dr. Hurwitz, Dr. McIver.
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.
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 …
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.”
Email from Mary Baluss, Esq., to the TPPCD listServ of the NFTP; 10pm, 2004-04-18; updating the advocacy community about the re-trial of Dr. William Hurwitz: “[The judge] granted judgment of acquittal on the three remaining counts that invoked ’serious bodily harm’ and carried a mandatory minimum penalty of 20 years EACH. She also deleted the ’serious bodily harm’ clause from the government’s conspiracy count, similarly reducing the penalty on conviction. This leaves ’simple conspiracy’ and some 50 counts of ‘distribution’ (prescribing) without a legitimate medical purpose and outside the bounds of medical practice…”
Dr. William Hurwitz concludes an October 2006 letter sent to friends and colleagues to raise money for his defense: “It has been over 20 years since Dr. Portenoy put the issue of opioid treatment of chronic pain on the professional and social agenda. Yet the struggle to set this treatment on a secure legal and social foundation is far from over. Patients continue to suffer, not only from unrelieved pain, but from the suspicion and neglect of a frightened medical community. My case presents an opportunity to establish humane boundaries for pain practice and to expose the …
28 Aug 2007 |
