army-doctor-landscape

Subject of a quality assurance investigation?

we defend military medical providers

Army   Navy   Air Force

uniformed, civilians, contractors

worldwide

"The biggest mistake providers make is thinking they can talk their way to immediate reinstatement when notified of an abeyance of privileges.  That 'talking' often is more harmful than helpful."

- Attorney Patrick Korody

Recent Clinical Adverse Action Case Results

  • USAF Physician: Proposed Adverse Action withdrawn prior to hearing after Korody Law sent a memorandum regarding the processing of the case and merits of the allegations to the MTF commander.
  • USA Physician: Privileges reinstated following hearing and request for reconsideration to the MTF commander.

Attorney Patrick Korody spent 10 years on active duty as a Navy Judge Advocate.  He has invaluable experience defending military medical providers accused of professional and personal misconduct, clinical incompetence, or impairment while working at military treatment facilities (MTFs). 

Mr. Korody dedicates a significant portion of his practice to defending military doctors, nurses, and other providers facing adverse privileging actions by military authorities.

"Save your license.  Save your career."

Worldwide Representation of Military Medical Providers

Consequences of an adverse privileging action.

Privileges will be denied, suspended, restricted, reduced or revoked.

Permission to engage in off-duty employment will be revoked.

Military members may be processed for separation.

Civilians and contractors may have his/her employment terminated.

The action will be reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank and state licensing authorities.

Do Not Stand Alone.

Hiring Korody Law means that you have an advocate in your corner.

An experienced advocate who understands your rights.

A trained advocate who knows how to exercise those rights to protect your career and licenses.

The Process.

Allegation.

If allegations are made that the provider engaged in misconduct or is impaired or incompetent, the privileging authority must determine whether or not a full investigation is warranted. The rules favor a full investigation following any allegation of misconduct or impairment that is not determined to be baseless through preliminary inquiries.

Abeyance.

During the investigation, a privileging authority will normally place the provider’s privileges in abeyance, meaning that he or she is commonly not permitted to practice medicine. A notice that a provider’s privileges are in abeyance is normally the first notice given to the provider that his/her privileges are at risk of being suspended, reduced, or revoked.

Quality Assurance Investigation.

An investigating officer, normally a provider with similar experience and training, will be appointed to investigate the allegations.  The investigation is not limited and may encompass a provider's entire practice of medicine.  The provider may be interviewed, and any statements made can be later used against them at a privileging hearing or other proceedings.

Review by Credentialing Board.

The investigation will be reviewed by the MTF's credentialing board, who will normally make a recommendation to the MTF commander on what action to take against the provider.

Commander's Initial Decision.

The MTF commander will review the investigation and recommendations, and can direct reinstatement with or without monitoring and evaluation, propose adverse action, or convene a peer review panel.

Peer Review Panel.

A panel of providers with similar experience, training, and qualifications will meet and review the investigation.  The panel can also request additional information and testimony from the provider.  The panel will make findings and recommendations to the MTF commander.

Clinical Adverse Actions and Adverse Privileging Actions for military doctors, nurses, and other providers are governed by Department of Defense (DoD) Manual 6025.13.

Each service has an instruction implementing the DoD Manual.

Commander's Proposed Final Action.

A commander can reinstate with or without monitoring and evaluation or take adverse action against the provider.  If adverse action is taken, the provider will be notified of the right to a hearing.

The Hearing.

A provider's primary due process right is an adversarial hearing before a panel of providers.  Witnesses will be called.  Evidence will be admitted.  The MTF is normally represented by a judge advocate. 

Hearing Findings and Recommendations.

The panel deliberates and makes findings for each allegation and makes recommendations as to what, if any, adverse action should be taken against the provider.

Commander's Final Action.

The MTF commander will review the hearing findings and recommendation and then take final action.

Appeal.

If an adverse action is taken, the provider has the right to a written appeal to the service's senior medical commander.

Final Action and Reporting.

If the adverse action is final, reports will be made to the NPDB and state licensing authorities.