Dr. Jane Orient

Executive Director, A.A.P.S.

 

Dr. Donald J. Palmisano

President, A.M.A.

 

Dr. Dennis S. O'Leary

President, J.C.A.H.O.

 

Dear Doctors Palmisano, Orient, and O'Leary:

 

         Given the personal and societal costs associated with peer review injustice, we think there is merit in protecting doctors' careers from the rigors of competitive bias by requiring due-process in medical peer review.  The Supreme Court has defined due process (Enclosures).  Ralph Bard M.D., J.D. FACS estimates that 20% of doctors subjected to biased peer-review commit suicide.  We urge doctors to include this consideration when selecting a practice, and to seek dual appointments at all times...   

 

    As an ethical responsibility, we will regularly alert physicians and students to the hazards of medical peer-review absent due-process.

 

     As a matter of public health, choice, and access to care, do you agree that due-process peer review should be a condition for payment of public funds (Medicare, HIll-Burton, etc.)?  We do.

 

   Would you support additonal ways to protect the public from loss of its physicians to prejudicial peer review, for example by requiring due-process peer review for accreditation by the JCAHO? 

 

                                       Verner S. Waite M.D., FACS

 

                                       Henry E. Butler III, M.D., FACS