Hark and Hark
  • Home
  • About
  • In the News
  • Our Recent Cases
  • Publications
  • Tv Videos
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • X Close
Select Page

Is it Time to Terminate your PHMP Contract ? — End The Torture

by rhark | Apr 6, 2020 | Blog, Drug Crimes, Dui, Firm News, Medical Nursing, Pennsylvania Criminal Law, Professional License Issues

I represent health care workers in Pennsylvania’s health care professional monitoring program.  Some are voluntarily in the program.  Some are forced.  Some of my clients’ contracts have been extended from 3 to 5 to 7 years in either PNAP, SARPH, or PHP for a minor, single violation of the Consent Agreement.  Some of these extensions are forced or voluntarily entered.  It is time to end your PNAP PHP SARPH probation.

Some clients have their PHMP probation terminated and their license suspended after the Board prosecutor files a Petition for Appropriate Relief or PAR.  This filing is made after the PHMP and PNAP/PHP case worker complains to you and then the prosecutor that drug tests are missed or positive, or other violations of the agreements or Board orders occurred.  The problem here is that case workers claim positive tests or other violations right when licensees are about to be finished their probation.

A recent case has such a recurrent time line, I thought I would lay it out. The licensee’s PNAP Agreement started before November of 2009.  The formal Consent Agreement is dated November 2009.  In July 2013 the PNAP case worker claimed a drug test violation.  However, obviously the licensee should have been out of the program by then.  In October 2013 the prosecutor filed a petition to suspend the license.  That petition carries an automatic license suspension until “things are figured out”.  This is the PAR.   Sound familiar yet?

Even before the PAR was filed, the licensee remained complaint with PNAP, attending an evaluation in July of 2013 that found an alcohol use disorder in full sustained remission.  This means there is no active impairment. The October 2013 license suspension matter did not get a hearing until October of 2016, a proposed adjudication was decided in December 2016 and the full Nursing Board ordered license reinstatement in March 2017.  From 2013 to 2017 the licensee’s license was suspended — but the alcohol use disorder was in full sustained remission as the license participated in PNAP the entire time of the suspension.

The PNAP compliance meant there was no ongoing impairment and there was no evidence of any disorder rendering the licensee unable to safely practice.  As a matter of fact and law, the Board could not — BUT DID — require the licensee to re-enroll in PNAP as a condition of reinstatement of license. To get a license back, the licensee had to follow the order.  This order was inconsistent with the facts and law that revealed between 2014 –  2017 the licensee  logged into record trek thousands of times and was tested at least monthly, costing over $5000.

Jump forward to 2020.  This licensee is ready to finish the three year DMU probation from March of 2017 to March 2020.  Not too funny, but the  PNAP case worker just now claims a positive drug test and claims the need for another extension of the contract.  Sound familiar?  Yes…. everyday I hear this story.  I file Petitions to Terminate this type of forced DMU Probation before PNAP or the prosecutor can file a PAR.

At this juncture after being forced into PNAP for 5, 6, 8 years, compliant licensees have attended thousands of AA meetings, 30-day inpatient, called Record Trac everyday, and undergo thousands of drug tests costing thousands of dollars.  Some clients have spent $15,000 in inpatient care, $2500 in on going forced out-patient care, and more than $7500 in drug tests.

The typical Board order forcing DMU enrollment can be modified and subject to termination at paragraph 45.  Please read that paragraph in your Board Order.  Or if its a Consent Agreement, it is paragaph 7.  Read them and call me.  The case is Kenney v. Bureau of Prof’l & Occupational Affairs, State Bd. of Pharmacy, 203 A.3d 421 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).  Also read Thim v. BPOA, State Board of Nursing, July 24, 2019 Not Reported in Atl. Rptr. 2019 WL 3315143.  These cases discuss the burden of proof for the Commonwealth when it alleges an ongoing impairment and when a licensee can get out of the DMU and PHMP.

In many of these cases, the Petition to Terminate Probation should be granted.  The Boards can not capricious disregard evidence of no ongoing impairment.  The Boards violate the law “when there is a willful and deliberate disregard of competent testimony and relevant evidence which one of ordinary intelligence could not possibly have avoided in reaching a result.” Bentley v. Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs, State Board of Cosmetology, 179 A.3d 1196, 1200 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2018).

Call me to discuss ending your PNAP PHP SARPH contract, DMU Order, and the torture these cases workers try to inflict every day, week, month, year of your probation.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Categories

  • Blog (28)
  • Criminal Defense (33)
  • Drug Crimes (26)
  • Dui (18)
  • Federal Crimes (11)
  • Firm News (301)
  • Injuries (5)
  • Medical Nursing (52)
  • Pennsylvania Criminal Law (31)
  • Philadelphia Criminal Justice Updates (12)
  • Professional License Application (35)
  • Professional License Issues (97)
  • Uncategorized (2)
  • USMLE and ECFMG (3)

Archives

  • January 2021 (1)
  • December 2020 (4)
  • November 2020 (5)
  • October 2020 (3)
  • September 2020 (8)
  • July 2020 (3)
  • June 2020 (5)
  • May 2020 (2)
  • April 2020 (8)
  • March 2020 (9)
  • February 2020 (7)
  • January 2020 (4)
  • December 2019 (8)
  • November 2019 (5)
  • October 2019 (6)
  • September 2019 (1)
  • August 2019 (3)
  • July 2019 (1)
  • June 2019 (3)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (6)
  • March 2019 (4)
  • February 2019 (5)
  • January 2019 (7)
  • December 2018 (9)
  • November 2018 (8)
  • October 2018 (7)
  • September 2018 (5)
  • August 2018 (6)
  • July 2018 (3)
  • June 2018 (8)
  • May 2018 (5)
  • April 2018 (1)
  • March 2018 (2)
  • February 2018 (2)
  • January 2018 (4)
  • December 2017 (2)
  • November 2017 (5)
  • October 2017 (3)
  • September 2017 (2)
  • August 2017 (4)
  • July 2017 (3)
  • June 2017 (6)
  • May 2017 (2)
  • April 2017 (3)
  • March 2017 (2)
  • February 2017 (1)
  • January 2017 (5)
  • November 2016 (3)
  • October 2016 (5)
  • September 2016 (2)
  • August 2016 (5)
  • July 2016 (1)
  • June 2016 (1)
  • May 2016 (1)
  • April 2016 (2)
  • March 2016 (3)
  • February 2016 (3)
  • January 2016 (2)
  • November 2015 (3)
  • October 2015 (2)
  • September 2015 (3)
  • August 2015 (1)
  • July 2015 (3)
  • June 2015 (3)
  • May 2015 (2)
  • April 2015 (4)
  • March 2015 (3)
  • February 2015 (1)
  • January 2015 (2)
  • December 2014 (1)
  • November 2014 (3)
  • October 2014 (1)
  • September 2014 (2)
  • August 2014 (2)
  • July 2014 (2)
  • June 2014 (5)
  • May 2014 (3)
  • April 2014 (5)
  • March 2014 (2)
  • February 2014 (1)
  • January 2014 (2)
  • December 2013 (3)
  • November 2013 (5)
  • October 2013 (4)
  • September 2013 (2)
  • July 2013 (3)
  • June 2013 (3)
  • May 2013 (5)
  • April 2013 (2)
  • February 2013 (1)
  • January 2013 (1)
  • December 2012 (2)
  • November 2012 (1)
  • October 2012 (7)
  • September 2012 (2)
  • August 2012 (1)
  • July 2012 (1)
  • June 2012 (1)
  • May 2012 (1)
  • April 2012 (1)
  • February 2012 (3)
  • January 2012 (2)
  • September 2011 (1)
  • August 2011 (1)
  • June 2011 (2)
  • May 2011 (1)
  • April 2011 (2)
  • March 2011 (2)
  • February 2011 (1)
  • January 2011 (1)
  • December 2010 (3)
  • November 2010 (2)
  • October 2010 (1)
  • September 2010 (1)
  • August 2010 (3)

Recent Posts

  • What to expect from a license investigation
  • DAUPHIN COUNTY ARD RULES CHANGE DURING COVID
  • PA Constitution Requires a Warrant Before Police Search Your Car. Commonwealth v. Alexander December 22, 2020 (Merry Christmas)
  • Can sleeplessness jeopardize your license?
  • How can communication help prevent problems for a doctor?

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

FindLaw

Hark and Hark | 2000 Valley Forge Circle - Suite 107
| King of Prussia, PA 19406 | Phone: 866-427-4552

© 2019 Hark and Hark. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer | Privacy Policy