A California recovery program keeps watch on addicted health workers — 
		but not doctors
		
		 
		Send a link to a friend  
 
		
		
		 [December 20, 2024] 
		By KRISTEN HWANG/CalMatters 
		
		California doctors struggling with addiction often don’t want anyone to 
		find out, especially the state board that has the power to revoke their 
		medical license. 
		 
		“Doctors are afraid of the medical board,” said Dr. Greg Skipper, a 
		Southern California addiction specialist. “The board is a blunt 
		instrument. It’s basically lawyers and cops.” 
		 
		When doctors are afraid, they hide, which experts and regulators say is 
		dangerous. That’s why, in the coming year, the California Medical Board 
		plans to ask lawmakers to allow it to create an alternative recovery 
		program that’s disconnected from its disciplinary power. 
		 
		Current law already lets state licensing boards create recovery programs 
		for health workers, but the medical board hasn’t made one for more than 
		a decade. Doctors call the existing law poorly written, ineffective and 
		harmful. 
		 
		They point to the experience of nurses enrolled in a version of the 
		program currently allowed by state law who say they feel trapped by it. 
		Some nurses regard the programs as too punitive. Doctors want a program 
		that prioritizes early intervention and treatment of substance use 
		disorders or mental illness over punishment. 
		 
		They could face opposition to their proposal. The patient advocates who 
		lobbied for the current law are opposed to the approach the doctors 
		want. They favor the transparency and discipline in the existing 
		programs. 
		 
		Both sides say they want to protect patient safety. 
		 
		The doctors’ proposed program would run independently from the licensing 
		board and grant confidentiality to doctors who remain sober and do not 
		endanger patients. It would be required to report to the board 
		noncompliant doctors or those whom it believes cannot practice safely. 
		It would also require other licensed doctors to report if they suspect a 
		colleague of impairment. Doctors who are suspected of harming patients 
		would not be exempt from discipline. 
		 
		Other health workers, such as dentists and nurses, are not included in 
		the medical board’s proposed legislation. 
		 
		“At its most basic level, we hope that it will cause physicians…to get 
		into treatment sooner rather than later, so that treatment happens 
		before any patient harm would occur in our system,” Medical Board 
		President Kristina Lawson said. 
		 
		Without a recovery program, the medical board can only investigate 
		reports of patient harm after they have happened, a process which 
		sometimes takes years. 
		 
		California is one of few states without a recovery program — commonly 
		called physician health programs — that offers doctors the chance to 
		seek treatment and help while monitoring them for sobriety. Between 10% 
		to 12% of health care workers will struggle with substance abuse 
		throughout their career, research shows. 
		 
		Experts with experience running programs in other states say 
		confidentiality and recognition of addiction as a chronic illness are 
		crucial to getting doctors to admit when they’re struggling. 
		
		
		  
		
		“The single most important thing physician health programs offer is a 
		safe harbor,” said Dr. Paul Earley, former medical director of Georgia’s 
		physician health program, who testified during a recent California 
		Medical Board meeting. “I can tie up to this dock and get some care, and 
		I’m not going to get hammered.” 
		 
		In other states, programs are typically administered by an independent 
		nonprofit organization that is responsible for evaluating doctors 
		suspected of impairment, managing their treatment and monitoring them 
		for five years. 
		 
		Patient advocates say this approach is unsafe. They argue that 
		California’s medical community has tried this before and failed. In 
		2008, the board ended a similar program after a series of audits 
		suggested doctors evaded drug testing and worksite monitoring. Patient 
		advocates also argue that confidentiality only lets dangerous doctors 
		hide from consequences. 
		 
		“Whatever transparency that the public has had will disappear,” said 
		Michele Monserratt-Ramos, a patient advocate with Consumer Watchdog. 
		Monserratt-Ramos, whose fiance died in 2003 after an operation from a 
		doctor with a history of substance abuse, was one of the advocates who 
		lobbied for the medical board to abolish the program in 2008. 
		 
		Monserratt-Ramos believes the state’s current laws and regulations, 
		which require strict oversight of doctors with addictions and penalties 
		for relapse, are working as intended. 
		 
		[to top of second column] 
			 | 
            
             
            
			  “We feel there were standards set in 
			place that protected everybody, and the board is willing to dispose 
			of them,” Monserratt-Ramos said. 
			 
			Lawson said the board acknowledges skepticism of this new approach 
			because of the previous program’s spotty track record. However, 
			Lawson said plenty of evidence from other states shows that programs 
			such as the one it is proposing are effective. 
			“My belief, and I think that the board shares the 
			belief that not having a program puts patients at greater risk,” she 
			said. 
			 
			Complaints about other addiction recovery programs 
			 
			Previous attempts to create a program for California doctors under 
			the current law — such as those that already exist for nurses, 
			dentists, and other health professionals — have stalled. Those 
			recovery programs are supposed to be a voluntary alternative to 
			permanent and public discipline, but they still must adhere to the 
			same regulations that govern disciplinary proceedings for 
			rule-breaking workers. Doctors say that defeats the purpose. 
			
			
			  
			Many of the criticisms raised by doctors’ groups have been expressed 
			by nurses during recent Board of Registered Nursing meetings. 
			 
			Nurses say they’ve been saddled with thousands of dollars of debt, 
			prohibited from working for months on end despite documented 
			sobriety and caught in a cycle of constantly changing program 
			requirements. 
			 
			California’s regulations have a “draconian reputation” among other 
			states, Georgia addiction specialist Earley said. During his time 
			leading Georgia’s physician health program, Earley said he counseled 
			doctors on multiple occasions that they should not accept training 
			opportunities or jobs in California because of their involvement in 
			a recovery program. 
			 
			That kind of system leads to doctors and other health professionals 
			hiding their problems from authorities, which is dangerous for 
			patients, said California addiction specialist Skipper. 
			 
			Medical board can suspend doctors 
			 
			Only 141 physicians are on probation for abusing substances, 
			according to the medical board. 
			 
			“They ought to have like 2,000 people in monitoring. They’re missing 
			a lot of cases,” based on the number of doctors in California, said 
			Skipper, who ran Alabama’s physician health program for more than a 
			decade. 
			 
			Ramos, with Consumer Watchdog, said it’s hard to say whether the 
			state is catching enough impaired health workers, but the law should 
			stand as-is. Doctors who cause patient harm due to substance abuse 
			or mental illness should face consequences, Ramos said. 
			 
			“If we look at a comparison when someone is harmed or dies in a car 
			accident, there’s consequences…They continue to come forward with 
			more legislation and increase those consequences and strengthen them 
			because lives have been lost. How is it any different behind the 
			walls of the hospital?” Ramos said. 
			 
			But experts say successful programs are not meant to help impaired 
			physicians evade consequences. They are meant to intervene before a 
			doctor harms anyone, said Dr. Chris Bundy, executive medical 
			director of the Washington Physicians Health Program and chief 
			medical officer of the Federation of State Physician Health 
			Programs, who testified during a recent medical board meeting. 
			 
			Bundy said he meets regularly with his Washington medical board 
			staff to report program results and discuss anonymized cases that 
			may need to be reported for discipline. Washington state law, in 
			contrast to California’s regulations, also gives him more 
			flexibility to exercise his judgement in how participants are 
			monitored and ensure their chronic illness needs are met, Bundy 
			said. 
			 
			Ninety-two percent of Washington state participants have had clean 
			records over five years and reported feeling burned out less than 
			half as much as the general physician population. To Bundy, that’s 
			success. 
			 
			“It’s not about getting through this program. It’s about, how does 
			this program change your life in a way that is transformative and 
			that you’re grateful for,” Bundy said. 
			 
			___ 
			 
			This story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed 
			through a partnership with The Associated Press. 
			
			
			All contents © copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved  |