House approves patients' rights bill

House approves patients' rights bill : Boston Globe p. B3

'Taylor's law' allows testimony before disciplinary board

By Scott Allen, Globe Staff, 2/26/2004

The state House of Representatives unanimously approved a bill yesterday that would give patients the right to attend disciplinary proceedings when they bring charges against their doctors, answering the plea of a father who complained that excessive secrecy prevented justice after the death of his infant daughter.

The measure, called "Taylor's law " for John McCormack's late daughter, would allow patients or their families to make a victim impact statement and bring an attorney to hearings at the Board of Registration in Medicine, which can revoke doctor's licenses for misconduct or incompetence. Currently, the proceedings are closed to the public and doctors facing charges routinely fight to prevent patients from playing any role.

"This is a great step for patients' rights that we've taken here today," said Representative Daniel Webster, a Republican who represents McCormack's hometown of Pembroke. "Up until today, these victims didn't even have the right to be present, never mind to address the physician or the board."

The Senate has already passed a version of Taylor's law, 37 to 1, but the Senate sponsor of the bill, Democrat Therese Murray of Plymouth, said she will oppose changes that Webster added to the House bill, including a statement that the state won't pay for patients' attorneys. If the two chambers can settle on a single bill, it will then go for final approval to Governor Mitt Romney, who has taken no position on the measure.

Nonetheless, House passage represents a remarkable milestone for McCormack, a state trooper who became a tireless campaigner against medical errors after his 13-month-old daughter suffered fatal brain damage at Children's Hospital Boston in 2000, when doctors waited all night to perform surgery to relieve pressure from fluid building up in her skull. The Board of Registration sent letters of censure to the doctors involved in the decision to delay, and McCormack got no chance to argue for tougher sanctions.

"My daughter wasn't represented fairly," said McCormack, who has staged one-man demonstrations in front of the State House in support of Taylor's law. "My wife and I were only notified after they made their decision. That's our daughter's life, so why shouldn't we be involved in the process?"

Ultimately, neither doctors nor members of the Board of Registration would argue with McCormack's logic.

Dr. Thomas E. Sullivan, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society, had opposed Taylor's law earlier in the week, arguing that it allowed so much public scrutiny that doctors would be deterred from voluntary cooperation in preventing medical errors. However, Sullivan said yesterday that Webster's amendment won him over by limiting the role of patients' lawyers as well as the state's obligation to pay for them.

Likewise, Dr. Martin Crane, chairman of the Board of Registration, dropped his earlier concern that Taylor's law would bury his agency in paperwork after a provision was dropped that would have required the board to post all letters of censure in doctors' online professional profiles.

However, it is by no means clear that the House version of the bill will become law. Senate sponsor Murray said she was surprised by Webster's amendment. She promised to fight for changes to guarantee patients' right to speak rather than simply submit a written statement and to eliminate loopholes that could allow the board to remove them at certain times.

The Board of Registration has made several recent moves to increase public involvement in its work, including a new easier-to-use website that lists disciplinary actions and malpractice settlements against doctors. In addition, board members have sometimes invited patients to talk about the impact of unwanted sexual advances and other offenses.

But Massachusetts still has a ways to go before its disciplinary proceedings are as open as states such as Kentucky, where the media and the public routinely attend hearings on charges against doctors. That's one reason why "most of our cases are resolved by agreement," said Lloyd Vest, general counsel to the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure.

And John McCormack said patients will continue to pay the price for the lack of public accountability. He said that another child died at Children's Hospital last May for the same root reason as his daughter: poor internal communication. The 5-year-old boy died when his epileptic seizure was not treated aggressively enough in part because doctors from different departments each thought others were directing his care, he said.

"They said they would learn their lesson, but they didn't," said McCormack. Passage of Taylor's law, he said, "is a step in the right direction."

Scott Allen can be reached at allen@globe.com