Washington State Supreme Court ruling regarding Healthcare workers

  1. Supreme Court ruling makes it harder for state to take disciplinary action against health care providers - 12/142006 Washington State Department of Health---Supreme Court ruling makes it harder for state to take disciplinary action against health care providersOLYMPIA - A ruling by the Washington Supreme Court will make it more difficult for the state to discipline health care providers. The court has ruled that the burden of proof in all professional license disciplinary proceedings is "clear and convincing evidence", rather than a "preponderance of the evidence" The "clear and convincing" evidence standard makes it tougher to prove a case. It is a more difficult burden to meet. This higher standard of proof previously was applied to actions involving physicians, but not to other health professionals.
    •  
  2. 10 Comments

  3. by   Gromit
    Good for them! It SHOULD be difficult to hurt someones' license. The crimes already severely punished (as they should be).
  4. by   West_Coast_Ken
    Here is another take on this story with a bit more balanced information on what happened and why, although it is rather brief, too.

    The Seattle Times: Search Results
  5. by   GardenDove
    Thanks Ken. I agree, I didn't like the negative tone of the article that seemed to view this as a bad thing. I feel that we should be given the same legal protections as physicians. I think this is a positive ruling.
  6. by   lyceeboo
    Quote from GardenDove
    Thanks Ken. I agree, I didn't like the negative tone of the article that seemed to view this as a bad thing. I feel that we should be given the same legal protections as physicians. I think this is a positive ruling.
    I agree give other providers the same legal protection as physicians. As it is now the burden of proof is on the accused, but the accused rarely have full access to the proof. (ie due to termination, intimidation and withholding of evidence by the employer, or "blackballing by co-workers", etc.)

    One small step in the right direction.
  7. by   aainme
    this is a wonderful ruling....the state boards of nursing have been using tactics against nurses that would never be allowed in other legal arenas... the fact is, when brought up on charges by the board ,few have the resources to fight till the end.... the consent orders nurses are forced to take are a direct result of the fear and intimidation the investigators use..... you will find you have less rights that criminals....the board has its findings of fact and you are GUILTY.... you then have to have the money and resources to prove you are innocent..... for those of us who work so hard day after day in impossible situations sometimes....these tactics are a slap in the face...as professionals the board should have to operate under a higher standard...the proof should be the boards responsibility....our license is something we worked years for...the standard to suspend or discipline a license shoud be high.....laura
  8. by   oramar
    People here have noted that their seemed to be a difference in standards practiced by BOM and BON. I now see proof that this difference is due to a policy and is not an accident.
  9. by   morte
    hmmmm doc=usually male

    nurse= usually female

    hmmmmmm
  10. by   sanctuary
    Quote from morte
    hmmmm doc=usually male

    nurse= usually female

    hmmmmmm

    :trout: Oh My Gosh... Do ya think???:angryfire
  11. by   Gromit
    Are the members of the BONs usually male? If not, then your argument is a bit more silly, and won't hold up. The two (nurse/doctor) also have entirely different attitudes about their respective professions -and the board of medicine is nowhere near as strict as the board of nursing. So if both are made up of people from their own professions, then its not a gender thing, but an attitude thing.
    Engineers only wish THEY had the kinds of attitudes from THEIR boards as doctors have from theirs. And engineers tend to be male also. So I stand by my argument that its not gender so much as attitude.
  12. by   kenny b
    Quote from Gromit
    Are the members of the BONs usually male? If not, then your argument is a bit more silly, and won't hold up. The two (nurse/doctor) also have entirely different attitudes about their respective professions -and the board of medicine is nowhere near as strict as the board of nursing. So if both are made up of people from their own professions, then its not a gender thing, but an attitude thing.
    Engineers only wish THEY had the kinds of attitudes from THEIR boards as doctors have from theirs. And engineers tend to be male also. So I stand by my argument that its not gender so much as attitude.
    Agreed. It seems people are sometimes inclined to jump the gun in these situations. I mean doctors also make more money, have more decision power, bill differently, are viewed by the hospital differently (as income generators), etc.

    It might be viewed as just a little offensive to imply that it is a gender issue without backing up the argument since anyone can just throw out comments. Of course the right to do so should still be inviolate.

close