Association of American Physicians and Surgeons - Letter to Utah Physicians AAPS website>>
1601 N. Tucson Blvd. Suite 9
Tucson, AZ 85716-3450
Phone: (800) 635-1196
Hotline: (800) 419-4777
A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943
Omnia pro aegroto
April 20, 2001
Dear Colleague:
Some say that patients have the "right" to receive pain relief. But you,
Doctor-reassurances from organized medicine notwithstanding-do not have
the right to provide it without risking your livelihood and your liberty.
Consider this scenario: You are caring for terminally ill patients, whose
families have signed advance directives. Patients are in pain, and you
prescribe reasonable doses of morphine. (You do not intend to provide
euthanasia.) The nurse gives the medication, and is supposed to withhold
it if the patient is oversedated. In due course, the patients die, as
expected.
Everything seems to be normal and routine until investigators start poring
over your hospital records looking for a Medicare billing problem. Your
coding, thank goodness, appears to be all right. However, a nurse who has
a grudge against you informs the investigators that there were five
"questionable" deaths in the hospital the previous winter.
About three years later, the County District Attorney decides to arrest
you and prosecute you for first-degree murder. The DEA revokes your
narcotics license, and the hospital suspends you from the medical staff.
You're out on $100,000 bail, and out of work.
Prosecutors "leak" defamatory information to the press, destroying your
reputation on the eve of trial. Local doctors don't want to support you.
Out-of-state witnesses are intimidated and harassed. The State hires
witnesses at $40,000 to testify against you. Still, you demolish the
prosecution's assertions on cross-examination.
At the last minute, the prosecution introduces lesser charges that you
really don't have a chance to address. To everyone's surprise, the jury
convicts you on those (manslaughter and negligent homicide). They
apparently think that the government should get something out of a
four-week trial, and they don't think you will go to jail.
Right after the verdict, they handcuff you and cart you off to prison to
begin serving a "one-to-fifteen" year sentence, with eligibility for
parole after six years.
In light of the travesty of justice, and with the help of an intervention
of a courageous colleague, the trial judge grants a motion for retrial.
You're out in six months: bankrupted by legal bills, with no way to earn a
living (your medical license, of course, has been suspended), and facing
new legal bills estimated to be $150,000 by the end of the new trial.
The prosecutor is unhappy that he didn't get his murder-one conviction, so
he is going to try again. If he loses on opposing your motion about double
jeopardy, he vows to appeal.
He has to vindicate himself, after all. The Judge called his conduct
"manifestly unethical" for withholding exculpatory evidence.
And now you have problems on another front. Having been told by the State
that you murdered their loved ones, some of the patients' families are
suing you for malpractice. At least you have insurance for that!
Sound like something from The Bonfire of the Vanities? No, too incredible.
Unfortunately, this is really happening to a Utah physician, Robert
Weitzel, M.D. In retrospect, he might have done some things differently.
But he feels secure enough about his treatment to post it on the Internet
for the world to judge. (See www.weitzelcharts.com.)
As with other legal outrages that AAPS has described, we expect organized
medicine (and many physicians) to react with denial. "He must have done
something wrong. This would never happen to me because I do things
differently and document them carefully". Before you say this, read the
charts.
The fact is that prosecutors have tremendous discretion. They can pursue
an innocent man like the Furies, backed by the practically limitless
resources of government. They can benefit from perjury, withheld evidence,
and a jury prejudiced by media coverage-all without sanction.
More of us would be in a predicament like Dr. Weitzel's were it not for
the integrity of (we hope) most prosecutors. It could be that Davis County
D.A. Melvin Wilson was acting in good faith when he started this case, but
that he made a mistake. If that is what happened, the right thing for him
to do is drop the charges.
But let us not blame it all on the prosecutor. Cases like this would never
make it as far as they do without the active and passive complicity of our
profession.
We need to demand open and honest discussion of the issues. We need to
hold judges and prosecutors accountable at the polls. And we need to hold
"expert" witnesses accountable for their testimony: expose it to the
sunlight and let them explain it to their colleagues.
There are several ways you can help Dr. Weitzel (assuming you have studied
the cases and decided he deserves your help-contact him at
raw1md@msn.com [or 801-581-0963] if you have a question).
1. Write a letter to members of the Board of Professional Licensure and
others who might have an influence in matters like this. Ask questions,
such as: "How can I prescribe narcotics without risking a prosecution such
as Dr. Weitzel's" We'll post contact information or mail it on request.
We'll mail your letter, with your name blacked out, if you'd rather be
anonymous.
2. Attend the double-jeopardy hearing at 9:00 a.m. on May 18, 2001, in Judge
Thomas Kay's 2d District Court in Layton, UT.
3. Make a non-deductible contribution to Weitzel Legal Defense Fund, c/o
Peter Waldo, Esq.-Trustee, 9 Exchange Place, Suite 1000, Salt Lake City UT
84111.
Sincerely yours,
Jane M. Orient, M.D., Executive Director AAPS
<<Back
to Home