Tencent Shares Slide After WeChat Restricts YuanBao AI Promotional Links 
Prudential Financial Reports Higher Q4 Profit on Strong Underwriting and Investment Gains 
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Says AI Investment Boom Is Just Beginning as NVDA Shares Surge 
Missouri Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Challenging Starbucks’ Diversity and Inclusion Policies 
Washington Post Publisher Will Lewis Steps Down After Layoffs 
FDA Targets Hims & Hers Over $49 Weight-Loss Pill, Raising Legal and Safety Concerns 
Toyota’s Surprise CEO Change Signals Strategic Shift Amid Global Auto Turmoil 
Uber Ordered to Pay $8.5 Million in Bellwether Sexual Assault Lawsuit 
TrumpRx Website Launches to Offer Discounted Prescription Drugs for Cash-Paying Americans 
CK Hutchison Launches Arbitration After Panama Court Revokes Canal Port Licences 
Rio Tinto Shares Hit Record High After Ending Glencore Merger Talks 
Once Upon a Farm Raises Nearly $198 Million in IPO, Valued at Over $724 Million 
SpaceX Prioritizes Moon Mission Before Mars as Starship Development Accelerates 
Alphabet’s Massive AI Spending Surge Signals Confidence in Google’s Growth Engine 
Instagram Outage Disrupts Thousands of U.S. Users 
Nasdaq Proposes Fast-Track Rule to Accelerate Index Inclusion for Major New Listings 
Weight-Loss Drug Ads Take Over the Super Bowl as Pharma Embraces Direct-to-Consumer Marketing 
TUCSON, Ariz., Dec. 01, 2015 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- In 1986, Congress passed the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA), which gives hospitals and other organizations that perform peer review virtually absolute immunity for actions taken against physicians under cover of protecting patients, even with malice or in bad faith, writes Dr. Lawrence Huntoon in the winter issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
The rationale, he explains, was the false perception that malpractice was increasing and that bad physicians could easily relocate and continue to harm patients. Also, the American Medical Association claimed that physicians would be unwilling to perform peer review if they could be held liable, as in an antitrust action.
“Nearly 30 years later, the immunity provided by HCQIA has resulted in rampant and widespread abuse of the peer review process for purposes having nothing to do with professional competence or conduct.”
HCQIA supposedly requires due process of law, but it contains a provision that states that if due process is not provided, it doesn’t matter, as attorney Victor M. Glasberg pointed out in testimony before the Civil and Constitutional Rights Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee: It “makes a mockery of the pretense of due process suggested by the language of the bill.”
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the floor manager of the bill, provided reassurance at the time: “I want to make it clear, however, that we fully agree that we cannot tolerate abuses of the peer review system,” as for anti-competitive activities, or “actions based on race, or any other prejudicial or discriminatory factors.”
However, HCQIA created a presumption that peer reviewers would meet its “reasonableness” standard and shifted the burden to the physician to prove otherwise. It is very difficult for a physician to prevail in court, and even more difficult to collect damages, Huntoon writes.
In today’s highly competitive and politicized climate, physicians who disagree with hospital policy or who bring attention to a patient care problem can face termination of their career in a “sham peer review” proceeding. “Physicians seeking redress and justice in the courts for sham peer review face almost insurmountable immunity provided to hospitals and peer reviewers,” Huntoon concludes.
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons is published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943.
Contact: Lawrence R. Huntoon, M.D., (716) 627-7759, or Jane M. Orient, M.D., (520) 323-3110, [email protected]
