New Studies Show Interracial Marriages Are Up

 One In Twelve Couples Come From Different Ethnic Backgrounds

"Mixed-race children have blurred America's color line. They often interact with others on either side of the racial divide and frequently serve as brokers between friends and family members of different racial backgrounds" Cornell University Sociology Professor Daniel Lichter

According to the Associated Press and NPR News story on February 16, 2012... the number of interracial marriages in the U.S. has climbed to 4.8 million, a record 1 in 12 couples, as a steady flow of Asian and Hispanic immigrants expands the pool of prospective spouses. Blacks also are now substantially more likely than before to marry whites. A Pew Research Center study, released Thursday, details a diversifying America where interracial unions and the mixed-race children they produce are challenging typical notions of race.

Another recent study from Cornell University claims that, “The number of interracial marriages involving whites, blacks and Hispanics each year in the United States has jumped tenfold since the 1960s.” But, older individuals are less likely to partner with someone of a different race.

The Cornell study also found that although more young adults are dating and cohabiting with someone of a interracial relationships, they are considerably less likely than same-race relationships to lead to marriage, though this trend has weakened in recent years.

Both studies do agree that… "The rise in interracial marriage indicates that race relations have improved over the past quarter century," said Daniel Lichter, a sociology professor at Cornell University. "Mixed-race children have blurred America's color line. They often interact with others on either side of the racial divide and frequently serve as brokers between friends and family members of different racial backgrounds," he said. "But America still has a long way to go."

The figures come from previous censuses as well as the 2008-2010 American Community Survey, which surveys 3 million households annually. The figures for "white" refer to those whites who are not of Hispanic ethnicity. For purposes of defining interracial marriages, Hispanic is counted as a race by many in the demographic field.

The Pew study finds that 8.4 percent of all current U.S. marriages are interracial, up from 3.2 percent in 1980. While Hispanics and Asians remained the most likely, as in previous decades, to marry someone of a different race, the biggest jump in share since 2008 occurred among blacks, who historically have been the most segregated.

States in the West, where Asian and Hispanic immigrants are more numerous, including Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico and California, were among the most likely to have couples who "marry out" more than 1 in 5. The West was followed by the South, Northeast and Midwest. By state, mostly white Vermont had the lowest rate of intermarriage, at 4 percent.

In all, more than 15 percent of new marriages in 2010 were interracial.

The numbers also coincide with Pew survey data showing greater public acceptance of mixed marriage, coming nearly half a century after the Supreme Court in 1967 barred race-based restrictions on marriage. The 45th anniversary of the decision will be June 12. In 2000, Alabama became the last state to lift its unenforceable ban on interracial marriages.

About 83 percent of Americans say it is all right for blacks and whites to date each other, up from 48 percent in 1987. As a whole, about 63 percent of those surveyed say it would be fine if a family member were to marry outside their race. Minorities, young adults, the higher educated and those living in Western or Northeastern states were more likely to say mixed marriages are a change for the better for society.

The figure was 61 percent for 18- to 29-year-olds, for instance, compared to 28 percent for those 65 and older.

Due to increasing numbers of interracial marriages, multiracial Americans are a small but fast-growing demographic group, comprising about 9 million, or 8 percent of the minority population. Together with blacks, Hispanics and Asians, the Census Bureau estimates they collectively will represent a majority of the U.S. population by mid-century.

"Race is a social construct; race isn't real," said Jonathan Brent, 28. The son of a white father and Japanese-American mother, Brent helped organize multiracial groups in southern California and believes his background helps him understand situations from different perspectives. Brent, now a lawyer in Charlottesville, Virginia, says at varying points in his life he has identified with being white, Japanese and more recently as someone of mixed ethnic background. He does not feel constrained with whom he socially interacts or dates.

According to the Pew report, more than 25 percent of Hispanics and Asians who married in 2010 had a spouse of a different race. That compares with 17.1 percent of blacks and 9.4 percent of whites. Of the 275,500 new interracial marriages in 2010, 43 percent were white-Hispanic couples, 14.4 percent were white-Asian, 11.9 percent were white-black, and the remainder were other combinations.

Still, the share of Asians who intermarried actually has declined recently from 30.5 percent in 2008 to 27.7 percent in 2010. In contrast, blacks who married outside their race increased in share from 15.5 percent to 17.1 percent, due in part to a rising black middle class that has more interaction with other races.

Intermarriage among whites rose in share slightly, while among Hispanics the rate was flat, at roughly 25.7 percent.

End Of Story….

Jack Swint-Publisher
West Virginia News
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Website: http://wvnewsonline.com/
Blog: http://westvirginianews.blogspot.com/
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline
.
.
.
.

Are You Aware Of The Death Master File

Government Agencies - Insurance Companies And Criminals Using Records Kept On Deceased Americans by, Jack Swint

"Thieves are pocketing fraudulent tax refunds after filing returns with personal information about recently deceased children that they found in the Death Master File. Armed with the deceased child's Social Security number and other personal information, the crooks falsely claim them as dependents." ...Jamie May, chief investigator at AllClearID.com

The Death Master File (DMF) is a who's who of about 87 million Americans who have died over the past 75 years. It includes names, state or county of residence, zip codes, dates of birth - death and of course Social Security Numbers. The file is maintained by the Social Security Administration.

Proper Use Of The DMF

It’s primarily used by leading government, financial, investigative, credit reporting organization, medical research and other industries to verify death as well as to prevent fraud and comply with the USA Patriot Act since 9-11. Medical researchers, hospitals, oncology programs all need to track former patients and study subjects. The SSA uses death information from the DMF to stop benefits to those who have died and provide benefits to surviving spouses and children.

Investigative firms use the data to verify the death of persons, in the course of their investigations. Pension funds, insurance organizations, Federal, State and Local governments and others responsible for payments to recipients/retirees all need to know if they might be sending checks to deceased persons.

By methodically running financial, credit, payment and other applications against the Death Master File, the financial community, insurance companies, security firms and state and local governments are better able to identify and prevent identity fraud. For John Q. Public, the DMF offers individuals the opportunity to search for loved ones, or work toward growing their family trees. Professional and amateur genealogists can search for missing links.

A Lack Of And Or Improper Use Of DMF

These files have been a valuable resource for life insurance companies when they use it, and ignored when some do not. These companies have access to the list to find out if a life insurance policyholder has died, at which point they must pay the beneficiaries. But, many insurers have not consulted the file, due to either neglect or even intent by leaving it up to beneficiaries to track down the policies and claim their money.

If the beneficiary doesn’t know their may be monies from deceased policyholders, the insurance company could keep it.

This all came to light in 2011 when Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty asserted that life insurers had held back $1 billion that could have gone to beneficiaries if insurers had only checked the Death Master File to learn whether their policyholders had died. Other insurance regulators quickly followed up.

Life insurers already have paid nearly $53 million as a result, according to a statement released by New York State Department of Financial Services Superintendent Benjamin Lawsky.

According to one company’s chief investigator… "Thieves are pocketing fraudulent tax refunds after filing returns with personal information about recently deceased children that they found in the Death Master File. Armed with the deceased child's Social Security number and other personal information, the crooks falsely claim them as dependents."

One Families Tragedy Turns Into IRS Nightmare

On February 2, 2012 Attorney Jonathan E. Agin testified in front of the House Ways And Means Committee about the tragic death of his 5 year old daughter Alexis, and how thieves then stole her information from organizations who take information from the DMF and offer it to the public as “genealogical data.” Thieves were able to obtain tax refunds from the IRS in 2010 by claiming his daughter as a dependant.

“In October 2011, after completing the difficult and grueling task of finalizing our 2010 taxes, I received a telephone call from our accountant advising us that someone had already filed a tax return for 2010 using Alexis’ social security number.” He went on to testify how “that same day, we reached out to the community of grieving cancer parents that we have come to know since April 2008, and told them what had happened. With incredulous amazement, we learned within a single hour of no fewer than fourteen other families whose children had died and also had experienced the additional travesty of their child’s social security number being stolen.”

Within a matter of seconds on the internet, “I was able to locate her complete social security number and other personal identifying information, including her birth and death dates, on several websites intended for genealogical research. I immediately contacted one of the services, who directed me to their outside counsel. When I asked the attorney to remove my daughter’s personal information from the website, he advised me that the service was within its legal rights to display the information and that it refused to remove her social security number.”

The common denominator in this tragic story is the Death Master File.

Media And Public Probes Force Changes

According to Jonathan Agin, due to an ongoing media probe and public pressure, the IRS for the first time recently responded to inquiries on this issue, and estimated that there were approximately 350,000 fraudulent tax filings in 2010. “According to IRS officials, these fraudulent filings claimed $1.25 billion in refunds. The cost to the federal government to investigate and prosecute that magnitude of fraud could be spent in much better ways, including research to fund cures for our children.”

In addition, it is worth noting that the federal government discloses far more information than is required.

In June 2008, the Inspector General of the Social Security Administration issued a critical report detailing how publication of the DMF has resulted in the breach of citizens’ personally identifiable information.2 The report concludes that the Social Security Administration “discloses far more detailed personal information in the DMF than required under the original consent judgment that resulted in the creation of the DMF. Under the terms of the agreement, SSA was to compile a list that identified deceased number holders’ SSN, surnames and dates of death.

Recent Changes In Public Access To DMF

As of Nov. 1, 2011, the SSA no longer discloses what it calls "protected state records" of deaths. Essentially, any records it acquires from the states, to insurance companies or the public will be withheld from the DMF. This action has declined the size of the Death Master File substantially; 4.2 million of its 89 million records will be excised from the public files and made available only to federal agencies.

And of the 2.8 million deaths reported to the file each year, only 1 million will be available to the public. In other words, most recent deaths won't be reported. And that will make it harder to figure out who is owed life insurance money.

Why the change? The SSA says it has discovered it is prohibited from disclosing death records it receives through contacts with the states, according to the SSA website. But the Death Master File has been in existence since around 1980. SSA has offered no comment on why it had taken so many years to discover it was doing something wrong.

End Of Story….

Jack Swint-Publisher
West Virginia News
(304) 982-7024
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Website: http://WVNewsOnline.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline

Links

Testimony Of Jonathan Agin

Changes In Record Keeping For The DMF

National Technical Information Service 

Social Security Administration's Death Master File

.

.

.

.

SSA Commissioner Claims No Silver Bullet To Stop Problems Within Agency

Is Commissioner Astrue Scrambling To Rehire Former ALJ Judges While Freezing Pay Raises And Increasing Workloads? by, Jack Swint

“Our inability to timely handle work makes the public more frustrated, and you endure that frustration. I also know that outcomes like pay freezes may cause you to question your career choice.”…Michael J. Astrue, Social Security Commissioner

Is It All Hands On Deck Or Abandon Ship?

This past Wednesday, February 8th, 2012 at 5:15pm,  SSA Commissioner Michael J Astrue sent a broadcast message to all employees that fell just short of doom and gloom for some aspects of the agency in 2012. When looking for someone to take a portion of the blame for SSA’s shortcomings this year, he pointed to Congress…

“We were surprised that Congress did not stick to the substantially higher level of continuing disability reviews called for in the debt ceiling legislation passed last August. This lower level of funding, combined with substantially more people filing hearings requests, requires us to shift resources.”

The Commissioner also announced there is a cut back on SSA employees assisting state agencies … “I have asked some employees who have been helping the State agencies to redirect their support to hearing offices. That transition has started smoothly, and I want to thank everyone who is helping our fellow Americans who have been waiting too long for a hearing decision.”

It’s not known what the trickledown effect this will now cause state agencies that depended on those SSA workers for support.

Astrue goes on to say that SSA suffered a net loss of over “4,000 Federal and State (related) employees in FY 2011 and we expect a net loss of over 3,000 employees this fiscal year. As we continue to lose staff, it means that in 2013, we will likely have about the same number of employees we had when I arrived in 2007, even though the volume of our work continues to increase.”

He admits that job related stress, higher workloads and pay issues equal an unhappy workforce. “I know that fiscal shortfalls create stress in our offices, especially when there are fewer of you to handle more work. Our inability to timely handle work makes the public more frustrated, and you endure that frustration. I also know that outcomes like pay freezes may cause you to question your career choice.”

Admitting there is a problem is a good foot forward, but as you read below, it appears Astrue is really taking three steps backwards.

Besides stress, heavier workloads and those pay freezes that he claims is partly the cause employees leaving; there is another possible reason. And it is a problem that was self-inflicted by early retirement incentives offered by SSA officials. A decision that added to the already disastress backlog of stalled appeals.
 

Early Retirement Verses Increased Backlog Of Appeals

Back in May 2007, Astrue assured Congress that SSA would correct the problem of surging growth in the number of individuals awaiting a hearing for disability benefits. He described an ambitious plan the agency had recently launched “to eliminate the backlog of hearing requests by 2012” and also “to prevent its recurrence.” At that time, appeals of 715,568 individuals were pending before what is arguably the largest court system in the world.

Four years later, in March of 2011, the commissioner testified again, emphasizing his accomplishments since 2007 that included the appeals hearings backlog problem. He also testified that SSA significantly improved service and stewardship efforts. Not exactly true according to at least one respected watchdog group.

Information analyzed by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, (TRAC) indicated that the overall number of individual claimants awaiting a hearing has not gone down but climbed to 746,712. That’s 31,144 cases higher than it was when the SSA launched its expensive rehabilitation plan in 2007.

The same data shows that between February 2011 and June 2011 backlog totals showed the largest single increase from 728,013 to 746,712. (18,699)

Coincidentally, also in February 2011, SSA issued a notice for all eligible employees to take early retirement, which included anyone at ODAR. Employees had to separate by June 3, 2011. This time, they included Administrative Law Judges (ALJ). According to at least one of the older judges, this was the first time they can remember an early retirement being offered to ALJs.

Keep in mind this is the exact same time period (February 2011 to June 2011) that data reflects the largest single spike in backlogged cases since 2008. Is it possible, that as employees moved quickly to take the early retirement, the exit of ALJ’s and or their support staff, caused a further lapse in backlogged cases being heard?


Is SSA Now Scrambling To Rehire ALJ’s Who Accepted Early Retirement In 2011?

Now, just one year after SSA’s early retirement offer in 2011, upper management has flip-flopped and appears to be scrambling to rehire that same group of Administrative Law Judges and support staff. Get them back to work ASAP. Is it possible that they now realize it was a very costly decision to offer early retirement and are now trying to put a temporary fix to it?

Remarks by judges on an ALJ posting board says it appears SSA officials want a "lot of bodies to fill those empty judges' chairs" created in part from their 2011 early retirement offer. Reportedly, the agency is looking to rehire judges who have retired within the last three years but not after 12/2011. Hiring retired ALJs probably will help to keep the backlog under control and keep costs for doing so under control as well.

Another judge adds that SSA could also save money rehiring these recently retired ALJ’s…“There are no additional retirement benefits that will accrue, and that most retired ALJs already have federal health insurance or are receiving Medicare. Also, their pay may come from a different budget line, such as a budget line for temporary workers.”

SSA even posted a contact person on the OPM website for retired ALJ’s interested in rehire.

Dina Khoiri

E-mail: dina.khoiri@ssa.gov
703-605-7280.

Commissioner Andrus referred to this rehire project of judges in his February 2012 message by saying… “While we are doing some very limited hiring, we are relying on retired annuitants and overtime at least until next year’s budget situation clarifies. I appreciate the help our recent retirees are giving us, and I encourage newer employees to learn as much as possible from these experts.”

SSA will also halt any further opportunities for early retirement. “Given the budget uncertainty, we are delaying a decision about offering early out retirement. We will revisit this issue in the fall when we have a better sense about our FY 2013 resource level.”


The Future Of Social Security Disability Insurance

December 2011 Republican Ways and Means RSS Article…

“The Social Security Disability Insurance program pays benefits to individuals with a disability that meets certain medical criteria, as long as they worked long enough and paid Social Security taxes. The continuing growth of the program is striking. At a time when workers paying into the system has increased nearly 70 percent between 1970 and 2010, the number of people receiving disability benefits increased by almost 300 percent, from 2.6 million to nearly 10 million.

By 2020, the number of beneficiaries will continue to increase by 18 percent to 11.8 million. By then total benefits paid will reach $188 billion. That’s a 52 percent increase over the $124 billion paid in benefits last year.

Experts tell us the program’s growth is due to the changing workforce, including the aging of the baby boomers, changes in disability policy over the years, and the still struggling economy. That continued growth is putting a massive strain on the Social Security Disability Insurance program.

According to the 2011 Trustees’ Report, without Congressional action, the Disability Insurance Trust Fund will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2018, just a little over six years from now. The path we are on is unsustainable, and we are putting individuals with disabilities at risk if we do not act soon.” End…


US Congressman Johnson Claims SSA Program Being Abused By Con Artists

On January 17, 2012 U.S. Congressman Sam Johnson (R-TX), Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee stated Social Security has become filled with waste, fraud, and abuse in the disability insurance program and that it cheats honest hardworking American taxpayers.

“We need to protect the American taxpayers from con artists, who are stealing from the system. How does he propose this? “By making sure benefits are paid only to those who deserve them.” (link below)


In Closing

SSA Commissioner Michael J. Astrue surmised his February 2012 message to all employees by admitting this is an uphill battle and … “There is no silver bullet, but we can’t ignore fiscal reality and assume that we can go on doing business as usual. As Deputy Commissioner Colvin has said, we will do less with less. We continue to look for ways to streamline and simplify work and identify what work we can stop doing.”

His message to all SSA employees, like the assurances to Congress back in 2007 regarding resolving the backlogged cases, offers no true light at the end of the tunnel for Americans waiting on their disability appeals or counting on SSA to be there when they retire. What will the Commissioner testify to Congress in another 4 years?

As reported above, according to the 2011 Trustees’ Report, without Congressional action, the Disability Insurance Trust Fund will be unable to pay full benefits beginning in 2018, just a little over six years from now. “The path we are on is unsustainable, and we are putting individuals with disabilities at risk if we do not act soon.”

It appears on the surface that SSA top officials are throwing everything at the wall hoping something will stick to it that offers a resolution to the ongoing problems ranging from employee morale, budget restraints, pay freezes, workloads, retirement, backlogs, simplifications, etc. This doesn’t include the report that by 2018, the Trust Fund wont be able to pay full benefits.

US Congressman Johnson accuses the SSA of becoming filled with “waste, fraud, and abuse in the disability insurance program and that it cheats honest hardworking American taxpayers.” That we need to protect Americans from “con-artists?”

When taking Astrue’s recent message, Congressman Johnsons statement, the Ways and Means Article and 2011 Trustee’s report and put them all together, you have one hell of a mess that a whole box of silver bullets cant stop.


End Of Story....

Jack Swint - Publisher
West Virginia News
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Website: WVNewsOnline.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline

Links

Appeals Disability Case Backlog

US Congressman Johnson Jan 2012 Comments

2008 Testimony On Retired Fed Employees Being Rehired

Why Police Sometime Mistake Insulin Shock For Drunk Driving

Adam Greene Now Hopes What He Endured Will Bring Awareness And Training For All Law Enforcement... by, Jack Swint

On the morning of October 29, 2010, 38 year old Adam Greene was driving to work. Henderson NV Police thought he was driving drunk, but he was having a diabetic attack.

Greene, a diabetic for 26 years, now hopes what happened to him will help bring awareness to the way officers are trained to deal with people suffering from medical conditions. He was severely beaten by an officer when police thought he was resisting a traffic stop. Portions of the incident were captured by dashboard cameras mounted in four Nevada Highway Patrol cruisers.

He is observed on video swerving as he pulls up to a traffic light. His car was approached by a trooper who draws his service weapon, kicks the driver's side window and yells, "Don't move! Hey driver, do not move!" When the trooper opens Greene's door, another officer moved in and placed a handcuff on one of his wrists. At that point, the state troopers, with assistance from Henderson police officers, pull Greene from his vehicle. Greene's four-door sedan rolls forward until an officer stops it.

Five officers force a dazed and confused Greene to the ground. A sixth officer, Henderson police Sgt. Brett Seekatz, is seen kicking Greene in the face multiple times, as one of the officers yells, "Stop resisting, mother fucker. Stop resisting, mother fucker!"

Once Greene is subdued, an officer discovers a vial of insulin on him and announces Greene "could be a diabetic." Moments later, an officer can be heard talking on the radio to a police dispatcher. "He's a diabetic. He's probably in shock, semiconscious." Other officers are heard joking about the incident.

Greene was not charged in connection with the traffic stop. When he arrived at a local hospital, he was treated for low blood sugar and multiple injuries that he said he received during the traffic stop.

Diabetic Shock & DMV Requirements

How can diabetic shock be mistaken for-alcohol intoxication? According to doctors, as the diabetic's blood sugar level drops lower, the organ most affected by the change is the brain. As the brain's functions begin to decrease, the diabetic will become weak and or become abnormally aggressive or uncooperative, could have slurred speech, and could easily be mistaken for being drunk or on drugs.

Like most medical conditions, low blood sugar is easiest to treat when it is discovered early, before it has become true insulin shock. There isn't very much time, because low blood sugar usually develops fairly quickly, over the period of less than an hour to just a few minutes.

According to the American Diabetes Association, most states have a law that requests that people with diabetes present the Department of Motor Vehicles with a doctor's report verifying that they have diabetes, but it is, at best, a request. If diabetics comply, then that information is required to be on the diabetic's driving record and license.

West Virginia’s DMV has a question on all applications (new and renewal) that allows diabetics to designate this information on their license.

Other states, like Georgia, have no restrictions, unless the driver suffers loss of consciousness resulting from diabetes. The driver will then lose his or her drivers license for one year and, in order to be reinstated, must remain episode free during this time.

California's driving restrictions on diabetics are among the strictest in the country. After a diabetic is treated at a medical facility for a lapse of consciousness, even one not involving an automobile, medical personnel are required to notify the state, and a diabetic can have his or her license revoked, even for a first incident. Maryland, may deny a driver license to an applicant with diabetes based on the recommendations of the Maryland Advisory Board.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, people with diabetes controlled by insulin are not allowed to be truck drivers. Thus, even though diabetics may be capable of driving a tractor trailer, they are not legally allowed to do so.

Greene’s Civil Rights Suit Settled

Adam Greene recently settled a lawsuit against the City of Henderson and the state of Nevada. Per the terms of the settlement, Greene will receive $158,000 from the city and $35,000 from the state. Greene's wife will receive an additional $99,000 from the City of Henderson. The $292,500 payout settles a federal civil rights lawsuit Greene filed against Henderson police and the Nevada Highway Patrol. The suit accused the agencies of battery, assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

"We think it's fair; we agreed to it and we're satisfied," Greene told KTNV about the settlement. "I was confused, but I wasn't resisting and I would think this would be incorrect and inappropriate behavior whether I was drunk ... or not drunk." He ended up with two broken ribs, cuts, a black eye and bruises.

But for Greene, it's what he doesn't remember that has helped him move forward. "I think it helps that I don't remember it," he said. "I'm far removed from something that was so personal and I think that helps me to forgive them." Despite the ordeal he has been through, Greene, whose father was an Arizona state trooper, said his family does not hold a grudge.

Since the incident, Henderson Police said they've seen a 30 percent decrease in the amount of use of force cases and are also reviewing the way they train their officers to handle these types of situations.

In Closing…

Adam Greene's case, while shocking, is not unique. Alan Yatvin, a legal advocate for the American Diabetes Association and a Philadelphia attorney, said police across the country frequently mistake low blood sugar for intoxication in people with diabetes. A Web search on the issue returns dozens of video clips and stories similar to Greene's. Symptoms of hypoglycemia include shakiness, dizziness, hunger, pale skin, moodiness, aggressive behavior, loss of consciousness and even seizures.

"You need police to be trained in what to look for," Yatvin said. "The problem is, there's no authority over all police departments. Every department has its own procedures, and states have different rules and training regimens."

Spokespersons from the WV State Police, several County Sheriff Departments and local Police departments all state that their officers have been trained to recognize not only diabetic type seizures, but other causes of health issues that can appear as alcohol or drug inducements.

End of Story…

Jack Swint-Publisher
West Virginia News
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Website: http://WVNewsOnline.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline
.
Links

Video Of Adam Greene Police Stop
.
Henderson NV Press Release
.
.

Obama Backing Off Of No Child Left Behind Program

President Calls Accomplishments To Date An Admirable But Flawed Effort

According to the following news story (written by education reporters Kimberly Hefling and Ben Feller) President Barack Obama will free 10 states today from the strict and sweeping requirements of the No Child Left Behind law, giving leeway to states that promise to improve how they prepare and evaluate students.

The first 10 states to receive the waivers are Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oklahoma and Tennessee. The only state that applied for the flexibility and did not get it, New Mexico, is working with the administration to get approval, a White House official told the AP.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the states had not yet been announced. A total of 28 other states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have signaled that they, too, plan to seek waivers, a sign of just how vast the law's burdens have become as a big deadline nears.

No Child Left Behind requires all students to be proficient in reading and math by 2014. Obama's action strips away that fundamental requirement for those approved for flexibility, provided they offer a viable plan instead. Under the deal, the states must show they will prepare children for college and careers, set new targets for improving achievement among all students, develop meaningful teacher and principal evaluation systems, reward the best performing schools and focus help on the ones doing the worst.

In September, Obama called President George W. Bush's most hyped domestic accomplishment an admirable but flawed effort that hurt students instead of helping them. He said action was necessary because Congress failed to update the law despite widespread bipartisan agreement that it needs fixing. Republicans have charged that by granting waivers, Obama was overreaching his authority.

The executive action by Obama is one of his most prominent in an ongoing campaign to act on his own where Congress is rebuffing him. No Child Left Behind was primarily designed to help the nation's poor and minority children and was passed a decade ago with widespread bipartisan support. It has been up for renewal since 2007. But lawmakers have been stymied for years by competing priorities, disagreements over how much of a federal role there should be in schools and, in the recent Congress, partisan gridlock.

For all the cheers that states may have about the changes, the move also reflects the sobering reality that the United States is not close to the law's original goal: getting children to grade level in reading and math.

Critics today say the 2014 deadline was unrealistic, the law is too rigid and led to teaching to the test, and too many schools feel they are labeled as "failures." Under No Child Left Behind, schools that don't meet requirements for two years or longer face increasingly tough consequences, including busing children to higher-performing schools, offering tutoring and replacing staff.

As the deadline approaches, more schools are failing to meet requirements under the law, with nearly half not doing so last year, according to the Center on Education Policy. Center officials said that's because some states today have harder tests or have high numbers of immigrant and low-income children, but it's also because the law requires states to raise the bar each year for how many children must pass the test.

In states granted a waiver, students will still be tested annually. But starting this fall, schools in those states will no longer face the same prescriptive actions spelled out under No Child Left Behind. A school's performance will also probably be labeled differently.

The pressure will probably still be on the lowest-performing schools in states granted a waiver, but mediocre schools that aren't failing will probably see the most changes because they will feel less pressure and have more flexibility in how they spend federal dollars, said Michael Petrilli, vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank.
While the president's action marks a change in education policy in America, the reach is limited. The populous states of Pennsylvania, Texas and California are among those that have not said they will seek a waiver, although they could still do so later.

On Tuesday, Education Secretary Arne Duncan said states without a waiver will be held to the standards of No Child Left Behind because "it's the law of the land."
Some conservatives viewed Obama's plan not as giving more flexibility to states, but as imposing his vision on them. Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., who chairs the House Education and Workforce Committee, said Thursday that, "This notion that Congress is sort of an impediment to be bypassed, I find very, very troubling in many, many ways."
Duncan maintained this week that the administration "desperately" wants Congress to fix the law.

In an election year in a divided Congress, that appears unlikely to happen.
Kline, who was speaking at an event at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said that in the House there was some bipartisan agreement on how to fix No Child Left Behind, but in many areas there was disagreement. He said later in the day he would release Republican-written legislation that seeks to restore states' authority in education.

California Rep. George Miller, the committee's ranking Democrat, has said such partisanship "means the end" to No Child Left Behind reform in this Congress. Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who chairs the Senate committee with jurisdiction over education, has said he believes it "would be difficult to find a path forward" without a bipartisan bill in the House.
A Senate committee last fall passed a bipartisan bill to update the law, but it was opposed by the administration and did not go before the full Senate for a vote. 

In Closing 

According to an August 2011 Charleston Daily Mail Article, West Virginia school officials will follow suit and ask for a waiver from Washington.  Within the story, State Superintendent Jorea Marple reportedly called the No Child Left Behind program a "flawed system." 

In 2010, only 85% of WV public schools met adequate yearly progress. 

End Of Story.... 

Jack Swint – Publisher

WV News Online

E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com

Website: http://WVNewsOnline.com

Twitter: @WVNewsOnline

.

.

.

.

SSI Lawyer Eric Conn Demands Cease And Desist Of News Stories

Lawyer In Huntington WV Social Security Scandal Wants Retractions From WV News.. by Jack Swint

“Although the Court is concerned by the alleged professional misconduct of the respondent, his agreement to cease all practice before this Court provides the Court and its appellants with protection from any repetition of such conduct by him"....by US Veterans Appeal Court Judges

Cease And Desist

The Kentucky Lawyer embroiled in the current Huntington WV Social Security Office scandal is demanding that stories we published involving him cease and desist immediately. Eric C. Conn also demands that we print a retraction of what he calls… “Erroneous and false statements” about him (Conn) and it be “accompanied by an editorial in which you specifically repudiate your libelous statements” against Eric C. Conn.

Conn first contacted WV News on August 2nd 2011 through attorney H. David Hicks, who practices with Conn’s law firm in Stanville Kentucky. In that letter, Hicks writes that… “If you do not immediately publish the requested retraction and cease and desist from tortuous interference and making false and malicious comments about the Eric C. Conn Law Firm, its employees, and its business, we will file suit against you.”

Our response? Just like in August 2011, we stand firmly behind the stories and that they depict the facts in the record. We would certainly welcome a law suite so that the truth comes out in open court through testimony from witnesses and available documents. Within his demands, Conn claims, in part, that we failed to name sources, provide statistics that show Conns higher than normal SSI disability approvals from other attorneys and even goes as far as to claim that even though we did not name him personally or his staff in one story; Conn feels that it merely implies that his law firm is not acting in their clients best interest.

Last week, we received a new notice from Richmond Virginia lawyer Domingo J. Rivera that he now represents Eric C. Conn and that Conn is once again demanding us to cease and desist any and all postings of stories portraying him in a negative light. This time, Rivera states that we must also… “Enter into an appropriate written agreement that you will refrain from any further unlawful activity against our client.” In what appears to be an attempt of intimidation by Rivera, he writes that it is not clear why, publisher Jack Swint, would engage in this “unlawful activity” against Eric Conn since he (Swint) himself has been convicted of “counterfeiting” in the past. 

Eric Conn’s Version Of The Truth

At the heart of Conns demands for us to cease and desist is the truth behind the 2002 US Veterans Appeals Court forever barring him from any further practicing of law in that court. (Linked below) Attorney Rivera states in his recent letter to WV News that Conn merely resigned on his own terms. “Mr. Conn decided to no longer practice in that area of law and filed motions to withdraw on multiple cases.” Rivera goes on to claim that his client just “decided to leave the Court of Veterans Appeals.”

In The Interest Of Justice And Integrity

But, according to Court records, (linked below) Conn was under investigation for numerous counts of professional misconduct. In order to halt that investigation, he decided to just resign from practicing law in that Court. That’s easy enough, or not? What attorney Rivera fails to address is the fact that the judges dictated to Conn that he only had one option, either accept their terms for his resignation or continue on with the current investigation. And, it is very clear by the courts stipulations and statements on record that their decision was based solely in the interest of justice; both to the public and the integrity of the court.

Judge Steinberg wrote that… “First, I note that the Court not only accepted the respondent's resignation, but dictated to him the terms and the form under which it would accept such resignation.” And, “Therefore, the Court imposed these conditions upon the respondent, i.e., his options were either to accept resignation on the Court's terms and conditions or to continue with the Committee's investigation process.”

“Second, the respondent proposed only to agree not to seek admission to practice before this Court at any time in the future.” But, in the official resignation from the Bar of the Court and on the form dictated by the Court, the respondent had to agree that he forever… “Relinquishes any right he may have ever in the future to apply for reinstatement or readmission to the Bar of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, either as an attorney or as a non-attorney practitioner.” 

In their September 30, 2002 ORDER and OPINION, (attached) …“Although the Court is concerned by the alleged professional misconduct of the respondent, his agreement to cease all practice before this Court provides the Court and its appellants with protection from any repetition of such conduct by him.”

The Judges went as far as to also state that unfortunately, this action could stop both public sanctions against Eric Conn and notification to the National Bar Association… “Furthermore, I would note that any member of the public, including of course, any judge or staff member of this Court is free to bring to the attention of the appropriate authorities the existence of this order and that attorneys may in fact be under a heightened obligation to take such action.”

The Scandal Within The Huntington WV SSI Office

Attorney Conn was named back in December 2010 by this news website and the Wall Street Journal as the lawyer allegedly involved in a huge disability case-fixing scandal along with ALJ Judge David Daugherty who since resigned-retired. It is alleged that collusion between Daugherty and Conn began back in 2005 when office staff began complaining to higher-ups of the exceptionally high caseload between the judge and lawyer compiled with the 98% approval ratings of SSA claims between the two. The Office of Inspector General (OIG) in Washington DC is investigating. 

Problems in the Huntington WV office also have raised questions on other possible problems including collusion, falsifying of records and retaliation against former ALJ Judge Tinsley for reportedly blowing the whistle on Daugherty and Conn as far back as 2005. During this same time, then Chief Judge Charles Andrus was facing allegations of racial discrimination. Recently, accusations surfaced that Andrus was the middle man in brokering a $250,000 a year job offer between Eric Conn and former ALJ Judge Al Tinsley in order to entice Tinsley to retire.

Also, according to our records, Eric Conn was paid $3,815,512.96 by the Social Security Administration in 2010. He was ranked 3rd in the nation as highest paid in SSI work. 

In Closing

Attorney Rivera claims that our story also alleges Conn was “disbarred” from the Appeals Court. He goes on to say that, “Disbarment refers to the act of disqualification of a lawyer from membership in a bar association” and that his client resigned from practicing in that court on his own terms just because he wanted to.

In reality, the stipulations Conn accepted with that Court does in deed disqualify him forever from practicing in the Veterans Appeal Court and membership to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims Bar Association. (CAVC)

Why did the court make it mandatory that he be forever barred? As one of the Judges wrote…“His agreement to cease all practices before this Court provides the Court and its appellants with protection from any repetition of such conduct by him.”

End Of Story...

Jack Swint-Publisher
West Virginia News 
Website: http://WVNewsOnline.com
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline
.

Links And Related Stories

Eric Conn 2002 US Veterans Appeal Court Document

Attorney Accused In WV Social Security Scandal Was Barred From Veterans Appeals Court In 2002

Is The Social Security Appeals Process Beyond Repair

Huntington’s Chief ALJ Named in Federal Lawsuit Alleging Racial Discrimination and Whistleblower Retaliation

Hearings Office Director Resigns Amidst WV Social Security Appeals Scandal

WV Law Allows Doctors To Keep Their Addictions From The Public

Board Of Medicine Keeps Physicians Chemical & Alcohol Impairments Confidential by Jack Swint

“…any information received, maintained or developed by the board relating to the alcohol or chemical dependency impairment of any physician, podiatrist or physician assistant and any voluntary agreement made pursuant to this subsection shall be confidential and not available for public information...” WV Code Chapter 30-3-09(C)(4)

Had he been a pilot, a train engineer, or even a bus driver, chances are random work drug testing would have discovered the chemical addictions of Podiatrist Jeffrey E. Shook before it was too late. Unfortunately for some of his patients, their lives will forever be altered because a WV law and the Board of Medicine permitted him to keep practicing while keeping his chemical dependencies a secret from the general public.

In fact, his Board of Medicine records show a malpractice claim in 2007 while on probationary restrictions. And, 2011 Court records show at least one more malpractice suit pending.

This same confidentiality law doesn’t just keep physicians like Dr. Shook’s addictions from the general public; it also bars civil discovery, court subpoena, or introduction into evidence in any medical professional liability action or other action for damages arising out of the provision of or failure to provide health care services.

Why can these addicted physicians keep their known chemical and or alcohol abuses confidential? Because, WV State Legislatures feel that it’s important to do so in order to encourage voluntary participation in monitored alcohol chemical dependency or major mental illness programs. And because lawmakers agree that major mental illness, alcoholism and chemical dependency are an illness. WV 30-3-9(h)(1)

In order to obtain this confidentiality, the law requires that the physician not have prior pending complaints at the time they enter into thier voluntary approved agreement with the WV Health Program and State Board set forth in WV Code Chapter 30-3-9(B). The agreement and stipulations may include rehab, random drug testing, counseling, fewer work hours and patients, monitoring by another physician and periodic reviews.

And, these agreed upon stipulations and conditions between the state and physician are not to be considered a disciplinary nature or available to the public. (WV Code Chapter 30-3-9(2) Bottom line, in these conditions, WV law will stop you from discovering if your physician -surgeon is impaired by an addiction to drugs or alcohol.

The West Virginia Board Of Medicine (WVBOM)

According to their website, the West Virginia Board of Medicine is the sole authority for the issuance of licenses to practice medicine and surgery, to practice podiatry, and to practice as a physician assistant for a medical doctor (M.D.) in the State of West Virginia, and is the regulatory and disciplinary body for the practice of medicine and surgery and the practice of podiatry and for physician assistants for M.D.'s in this State.

There are thirteen office staff on hand ranging from the director to a receptionist-verification coordinator. Out of fifteen Board Members, fourteen are appointed by the governor. Eight of the members are appointed from among individuals holding the degree of doctor of medicine and two shall hold the degree of doctor of podiatric medicine. One member shall be an individual licensed by the board as a physician assistant.

Each of the 8 doctor- members must be duly licensed to practice his or her profession in this state on the date of appointment and must have been licensed and actively practicing that profession for at least five years immediately preceding the date of appointment. Three lay members shall be appointed to represent health care consumers.

NOTE: A quick search of each Board Members license shows that 4 of the 8 physicians appointed to the Board have medical malpractice settlements on record.

1. Podiatrist Richard Curtis Arnold, who practices in South Charleston WV has had 3 recorded malpractice complaints dating from 1995 to 1996 and settled for a total of $156,000. He has served on the board since 1993 and his latest term came in 2007 from former governor Joe Manchin. (Dr. Arnold and Dr. Shook practiced together in 2010)

2. Dr. M. Khalid Hasan, who practices in Beckley WV, has 1 recorded malpractice settlement in 1979 in the amount of $17,500. He was appointed in 2001 by former governor Bob Wise.

3. Dr. Carlos C. Jimenez, who practices in Glen Dale WV, has 1 recorded malpractice settlement in 2000 in the amount of $160,000.He was appointed in 2007 by former governor Joe Manchin.

4. Dr. Badshaw Wazir, who practices in South Charleston WV, has 1 recorded malpractice settlement in 2001 in the amount of $5,000. He was appointed in 2004 by former governor Bob Wise.

The Case Of Logan Podiatrist Jeffrey E. Shook

We were able to gain access to one chemical addicted doctor’s actual agreement, only because he also practiced in Ohio, which allows public access to these records.

Logan Podiatrist, Jeffrey Edward Shook, (pictured to the left) is one of the doctors that the confidentiality law in WV was used in order to protect his chemical dependency from the public. And, according to his own admissions contained in the Ohio Board of Medicines agreement, (linked below) those addictions were most likely the cause of malpractice claims and other complaints.

Shockingly enough, because Shook’s agreement and terms in WV were kept confidential, the State Medical Board didn’t take any action against him when he violated those terms and conditions after at least one new malpractice claim occurred just 5 months after signing the confidentiality agreement and being placed on probationary restrictions in 2007.

That case recently settled in 2011 for $200,000. Also, the Ohio Board never made the connection between the date Shook entered into the 2007 WV agreement and the subsequent malpractice suit 5 months later.

In April 2011, Shook was named as a co-defendant in another lawsuit filed by Stephanie Bego who alleges she went to him in 2009 to remove a pin from her foot left by another surgeon. Shook agreed to the operation but according to Bego’s complaint, he… "Evidently decided not to remove the pin from the plaintiff's foot,"

Doctor Shook’s public information is available on the WVBOM website at the link below. He was licensed in this state back in March 1996 and is valid through June 2013. A work address of 20 Hospital Drive, in Logan WV is also on file. Because of his 2007 confidentiality agreement, the website states that Shook has “no discipline records on record.”

But, it does list 4 malpractice claims in which 2 were paid totaling $700,000. Ohio Board Members placed Shook on probationary sanctions on March 6, 2009 because of his West Virginia agreement for his admitted “Hydrocodone” drug addictions in 2006.

According to US District Court filings, civil case 3: 09-1004 (linked below) in Huntington, it appears that Dr. Shook admitted to the WV and OH Board of Medicine that he had a chemical dependency that was mentally and physically impairing his ability as a podiatrist. And he was seeking rehabilitation of that disease beginning in August 2006 when he entered into a short term (10 day) rehab program in Savannah GA that was approved by the WVBOM.

During that time Shook voluntarily gave up his license to practice even though there is no mention of that in his public records. Coincidently, just one month after entering the substance abuse rehab, Shook’s insurance company paid a malpractice claim of half a million dollars for a botched surgery in 2000.

One source for this story claims that part of that malpractice settlement included his seeking rehab for his drug addiction.

The Ohio probationary stipulations were to run for a minimum of 3 years and included intense drug counseling, psychiatric treatment, specific and random drug testing, and restriction on traveling outside of Ohio. It was also ordered for an approved physician to monitor Shook’s medical practice, surgeries, patient charts and work hour limitations.

Shook’s restrictions in WV included his refraining from drugs and alcohol, AA and DA meetings at least 4 times a week, unlimited-random drug testing, care by an addiction psychologist, supervision by an approved physician in his office and during surgery, work no more than 30 hours a week, appear before the committee for progress reports.

The entire Ohio-WV Agreements and US District Court case are linked below

Are Doctors Addictions Becoming An Epidemic Across The Country

Research we conducted across the U.S. shows that WV is not the only state that provides confidentiality to its physicians under the law. And, like WV, some physicians who are allowed to practice under the cloak of confidentiality are still endangering innocent and completely unknowing patients.

Why is that? Because doctors, unlike airline pilots, truck drivers, some big-city firefighters, and other professionals whose performance impacts public safety in the United States, are not required by law or regulation to be randomly screened for drug use. As a result, you have zero guarantees that the surgeon fixing your ACL, or administering your medication, or even the dentist performing your root canal isn't quietly hooked on something that could inhibit or completely annihilate his or her ability to treat you safely and effectively.

"The American public has accepted the idea that a physician works in the patient's best interest. And most physicians do," says Lucian Leape, M.D., a professor of public health policy at Harvard's school of public health and a leading advocate for patient safety. "But in the past 20 years, there's more and more evidence that we have some definite problems."

There's so much evidence that Dr. Leape now believes it's time to flip the current arrangement on its head to move from a system in which patients must blindly trust that the people treating them are drug and alcohol free to a system in which health care workers are required to prove, through random and periodic drug testing, that they're drug- and alcohol-free.

"I'm very much in favor of random testing," Dr. Leape says. "We have a responsibility to identify problem doctors and bring them into treatment." And to protect patients in the process.

Drug Testing For Doctors?

No one looks forward to the prospect of peeing into a plastic container to prove he or she is fit to do a job. Yet all clinical members of the anesthesia department at Massachusetts General Hospital, (one of the countries oldest and most prestigious medical facilities) are required to do exactly that. If their tests come back clean, the residents are free to keep on practicing. If not, a second sample is sent to another certified lab for confirmation. If the second sample is positive, the doctor is steered into treatment for drug use.

This program, along with a similar one that's in effect at the Cleveland Clinic, began in 2004 after a rash of publicity emerged about high addiction rates among anesthesiologists. (A 2005 survey by the Cleveland Clinic Foundation found that 80 percent of anesthesiology residency programs had problems with drug-impaired residents.)

"Some view it as an invasion of privacy. But others feel we have the safety of the public in our hands, just like bus drivers and pilots do," says Michael Fitzsimons, M.D., the Massachusetts General anesthesiologist who is the driving force behind the testing program. "And because of that, we not only have to be drug-free, but also have to prove we're drug-free."

Even the courts have generally ruled in favor of drug screening for people who hold jobs that may pose a threat to public safety, and the public seems to have accepted the idea of giving up some rights in exchange for greater safety and security.

The notion of workplace drug screening as a way to protect the public, first gained momentum in the 1980s; it was a Reagan-era response to the rise of casual drug use. President Ronald Reagan himself signed an executive order in 1986 mandating drug screening of all federal employees.

In Closing…

The government and the public seem to have little problem telling a blue-collar subway engineer to offer up his urine, but we've been far more hesitant to put the same demands on a Harvard-trained oncologist or a Johns Hopkins cardiologist. "There's a long history of professionalism when it comes to medicine," says Harvard's Dr. Leape, "and the public has generally accepted the idea that physicians are self-regulating."

Laws are generally created and enforced for the good and safety of the general public. WV Code 30-3-09 is designed to provide confidentiality to physicians who admit that they have a drug and or alcohol addiction that is effectively impairing their ability to work. And in most cases, these doctors are allowed to continue working while seeking help for the effects of this disease.

Doesn’t the public have a right to know if the WV Board of Medicine has knowledge of any doctor’s drug or alcohol addictions, especially if they are allowed to continue treating patients during this probationary time period?

In the case of Jeffrey Shook, records show that 1 month after he notified the board of his drug addiction in 2006, (and subsequent 10 day stint in a GA rehab) his insurance company paid $500,000 to a former patient for malpractice.

Then, after only 5 months from entering into his 2007 agreement with the WVBOM, a new malpractice complaint was filed against him. It recently settled for $200,000. One is still pending....

Doctors are not driving trucks, delivering the mail or any other blue collar job. They are caring for and performing surgery on human beings. Having the life of another in your hands is almost sacred. There should be no tolerance to a doctor’s impairment due to drugs or alcohol whether it is classified a disease or not!

Bottom line, many non-physicians around the world also suffer from these same type addictions or “diseases.” They are no longer able or allowed to perform the job they once had. Nor did they take an oath to treat and protect life to the best of their ability and judgment.

Nor did they swear to “maintain this sacred trust, holding myself far aloof from wrong, from corrupting, from the tempting of others to vice.”


End Of Story….

Jack Swint-Publisher
WV News 2011
(304) 982-7024
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline


Links

Hippocratic Oath

Dr. Jeffrey Shook’s Ohio And WV Agreement

WV Code-Chapter 30-3-9

US District Court Document From Case 3:09-CV-01004 Maynard vs Shook

WVBOM Public Discipline Reports From 1990 To Present

WVBOM License Search

Doctor Seth Stinehour Health And Safety News Articles
.
.
.
.
.
.

Is Your Boss A Micromanager

Why Is It So Many New Managers Tend To Micromanage?

While it’s unfair to paint all young supervisors as micromanagers, it’s a fairly common trait among new leaders for at least three reasons.

In a January 13, 2012 article by Tom Fox, with the “Partnership for Public Service,” claims that new supervisors are often promoted as aresult of their exceptional performance doing the job of the people they’re now supervising. “We tend to do what we know best, so it’s natural for new supervisors to continue doing their job and maybe your job too.”

A new supervisor could also be getting to know his or her new employees and as such will tend to provide more direction than less when initiating a project with their new team.

Micromanagement can also result from a new manager’s team needing a higher level of direction and not being aware of this situation. Depending on the circumstances surrounding the transition, the previous supervisor may have become relaxed in providing feedback, and as a result, the team might have grown accustomed to relatively less supervision when in fact more guidance is needed.

After considering the possible reasons for micromanagement, the question to ask yourself, “What can I do about the situation?”

If you’re the new supervisor and you’re concerned that you may be micromanaging your team, congratulations! Admitting that you have a problem is always the first step to changing your behavior. Next, consider your personal reasons for micromanaging. Are you simply clinging to your old job? Are you, in fact, trying to get to know your folks? Or, do you feel that they need regular counsel?

Once you’re comfortable with diagnosing the reasons behind your management approach, it’s best to have some one-on-one conversations with your supervisor and team members. It’s likely that your supervisor has been through this same transition and can offer some great insights into how to become a more flexible supervisor.

After talking with each member on your team individually, you can then reassess whether you need a lighter management touch more generally, or whether you need a varying approach for each team member. Whatever your approach, it’s important to develop a plan of action. To the extent that your plans are appropriate for the whole team, call a team meeting and set new expectations. If the outcome is more variable, have a concrete conversation with each team member to ensure that you’re shared expectations are completely clear.

Now, the response to the question, “What do I do about the situation?” is more complex if you’re the one being supervised. The good news, however, is that the New Year is a great time to have a conversation with your supervisor about expectations and plans for 2012 even if you already set your formal performance plan at the end of last year.

Within this context, it should be easier to share with your supervisor how you would like to take on more responsibility and gain more autonomy over the next year. Then, you can ask your supervisor what it would take to make her feel more comfortable with these new responsibilities. Demonstrating the confidence to initiate this professional conversation will help you show your supervisor that she should trust your abilities to get things done.

You can e-mail Tom Fox at: fedcoach@ourpublicservice.org

End of Story...

Jack Swint-Publisher
WV News 2011
(304) 982-7024
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline
.
.


.

Doctor Caught On Tape Trading Drugs For Sexual Gratification

Jack Mark Levine Has A Long List Of Infractions And Complaints In WV And OH by Jack Swint

“It’s a case of a physician who fulfilled his own sexual selfish desires by engaging in conduct that is considered depraved. He controlled, he dominated and he manipulated not just patients, but vulnerable patients with built-in credibility issues. That is, these patients were all drug addicts”… Assistant Ohio Attorney General Julie Pfeiffer

Dr. Jack Mark Levine was born in New York and graduated from the New York College of Osteopathic Medicine in 1982. In addition to Ohio, Dr. Levine held medical licenses in West Virginia and Illinois. He was board-certified by the American Board of Osteopathic Surgeons in 1995 in general surgery and critical care medicine, and became a fellow of the American College of Osteopathic Surgeons in 1998.

Here was a man who had the world in the palm of his hands. But, beneath the public and state medical board’s radar, Doctor Levine’s multi state practices were beginning to crumble as medical mistakes and indiscretions mounted in both WV and Ohio.

Malpractice And Settlements Come First

According to documents we obtained, Levine was facing allegations of at least 2 wrongful death suits dating as far back as 1992. The first was in Mason County WV involving Kandi Tweety. The other was filed on the behalf of Helen Zeigler in Cabell County. Malpractice Liability forms filed by Levine to the State Board show that his insurance carrier paid $100,000 on the Tweedy complaint in 1992 and $400,000 in the Zeigler action in 2000.

Four additional Malpractice complaints were filed against Levine from 1994 to 1998. One report alleges Levine failed to totally remove a catheter from the chest of one of his patients. Cabell County records also show a 2001sexuall harassment lawsuit filed against Levine and others by Dr Maria Teresita Paulin Antigua-Martinez (01-C-467).

Drugs For Sexual Gratification Caught On Audio Tape

In 2008, Levine was notified that he was under investigation by the Ohio State Medical Board for 3 counts of misconduct. The charges arose from his treatment of three female patients who the board only referred to as Patient 1, Patient 2, and Patient 3. Levine treated each patient for opioid addiction by prescribing Suboxone, a drug designed to minimize withdrawal symptoms and curb addiction to opioids.

The board's first charge alleged that between November 2007 and December 2007, Levine engaged in sexual misconduct with Patient 1 over the course of several "inappropriate" phone calls that were secretly tape recorded by the patient. Specifically, the board alleged that Levine asked Patient 1 to write him notes about sex and masturbation; he told her that "she needed a master to tell her what to do" and asked her to say "F… me master.” He told her that he "would like to ‘f…her’ and that when he called she should be ‘Ready to f….’

Levine was recorded telling her that she should see his "cock right now" and also told her that he wanted her to "get a vibrator.” He also referred to her as his "sex toy" and asked her whether she liked what she felt, referencing to his penis, when she was previously in his office.

In the second and third charges, the board alleged that Levine engaged in sexual misconduct with Patient 2 and Patient 3 at separate times in 2007. According to the second charge, appellant told Patient 2, after she tested positive for the use of drugs other than Suboxone, that she would have to "prostitute herself" again for him to prescribe her more Suboxone.

The third charge alleged that Levine asked Patient 3 to write him notes about masturbation and to bring him those notes on her next visit, and that he inappropriately "touched" and "bounced" her breasts when examining her during an office visit in 2007.

Ohio Assistant Attorney General Julie Pfeiffer testified at Levine’s hearing and stated that “this case is one of the most disturbing” cases that she had ever tried before the Board. “This is not a case about two people who cared for each other, two people who fell in love or even two people who had a physical attraction for each other. It’s a case of a physician who fulfilled his own sexual selfish desires by engaging in conduct that she considers depraved. He controlled, he dominated and he manipulated not just patients, but vulnerable patients with built-in credibility issues.”

Ms. Pfeiffer stated that this was not a compassionate, two-sided affair. It was Dr. Levine crossing all bounds of decency, morality, and integrity to get what he wanted from an extremely vulnerable patient. Ms. Pfeiffer commented that Dr. Levine talks about being taken aback and not being truthful at first, but he didn’t know about the tapes right away. It was after the tapes were made known to him that he decided to admit those allegations.

Pfeiffer also stated that “if the Board didn’t have those tapes, Dr. Levine probably wouldn’t be here today.”

In his defense, Mark Levine pleaded with the board members (in part)…. “I pray that the Board will not judge my 25-year career in healthcare by my shameful words I uttered two years ago. For you to take my livelihood away over this will hurt my wonderful family who are just totally innocent. I have three wonderful children, two still in college, and an incredibly bright and beautiful wife.

And they have endured such embarrassment due to my inexcusable actions. To take away my ability to support them over an inappropriate phone call seems very unfair to them." (The entire Ohio hearing is linked below.)

The Boards Decision

The Ohio State Medical Board permanently suspended Jack Mark Levine’s license to practice medicine in September 2009. Subsequently, on April 06, 2010, Illinois Medical Board revoked Levine’s license. Then on October 18th, 2011 the WV Medical Board revoked his license too.

Levine appealed the decision to the Ohio Supreme Court and lost. He is reportedly to be residing in Piketon Ohio and had been allowed to teach, but not practice, osteopathic medicine in or near Detroit Michigan.

One Unanswered Question

The Ohio Board members did ask one question that Levine still has never answered. Why, would a man, who is Board-certified in surgery, decided to prescribe Suboxone? Especially when he had no specialty training in psychiatry or addiction medicine?

Levine did have the legal right to prescribe the drugs because he passed an “on-line test by the FDA,” the Board didn’t charge him with this. Board members noted that when physicians step out of their areas of competency, the areas for which they’ve been trained, they generally do get into trouble.

In Closing

Jack Mark Levine’s medical license should have been reviewed/revoked back in the 1990’s due to the numerous related malpractice reports against him that include wrongful death civil suits for causing the death of at least 2 of his patients.

Then, at some point in time, he elected to go outside of his area of expertise and began treating female patients who he knew to be drug addicted and vulnerable. He used their dependency to act out his sexual fantasies and or needs by objectifying these 3 patients to a place in his mind where he referred to at least one as his “sex toy” on tape.

All doctors should hold their patients above anything else; his pattern of malpractice alone is inexcusable, but compiled with the fact that he also categorized these 3 female patients as sex toys/slaves, goes beyond discipline and loss of his medical license. It should be investigated for possible criminal charges.

Levine’s actions go against all of the simplest fundamentals in the practice of medicine, and it goes way beyond any defense possible.

End Of Story...

Jack Swint-Publisher
WV News 2011
(304) 982-7024
E-Mail: WestVirginiaNews@gmail.com
Twitter: @WVNewsOnline


Links

Ohio State Medical Board-Jack Mark Levine

Ohio Supreme Court Decision
.
.
.
.
.