Whistleblowers often pay a high price for exposing flaws in the healthcare system. Like a lot of physicians who have been in his situation, Gil Mileikowsky, MD, essentially lost his livelihood. It started in 2000 when he was approached by a lawyer representing a patient whose Fallopian tubes were removed without consent. He hadn’t heard of the case, even though it happened in his own department, and he began to suspect that other patient safety incidents weren’t being reviewed through the proper channels. He agreed to serve as an expert witness against Tarzana Regional Medical Center, a joint venture of HCA and Tenet HealthSystem, and four days later the hospital CEO informed him that he would be escorted by security while on hospital grounds. A few months later he was suspended.

That was just the beginning of a long legal battle that is still ongoing. The American Medical Association, the California Medical Association, and other physician and consumer organizations—including a partnership between doctors and trial lawyers spearheaded by attorney Alan Dershowitz—filed amicus briefs on Mileikowsky’s behalf. For many of his supporters, the central issue is peer review and whether hospitals should have authority to remove a physician without due process. His case recently led to a new California law that extends whistleblower protection to all physicians, and he has campaigned for similar protections on the federal level.

But in Mileikowsky’s eyes, he is locked in a much grander struggle to improve the quality of the healthcare system. He founded the Alliance for Patient Safety to document his case and push for safety reforms, and he has developed what he believes is a solution to poor quality control—a “black box” for physicians. Hospital errors should be reviewed in double-blind studies by randomly selected specialists to remove bias or potential conflict of interest, he argues. Although he never intended to become a whistleblower, he says his goal is now to expose flaws in the entire system, not just one hospital.

Whistleblowers like Mileikowsky play an important role in an industry that is often unsuccessful at policing itself; they now initiate nine out of 10 fraud cases for the Department of Justice. Although in some situations they stand to receive up to 25% of any amount recovered, that wasn’t the case for Mileikowsky. “I didn’t wake up one day and say, ‘I want to become a whistleblower,’” he says. “A whistleblower is just someone who tries to sound the alarm about a wrong situation.

(more here)

(Washington) – As part of the National Whistleblower Assembly conference currently underway, the Government Accountability Project (GAP) will host a panel discussion on Capitol Hill examining the past, current, and future state of the controversy surrounding the warrantless wiretapping scandal.   

Further information about the panel and Whistleblower events can be found in this press release and the GAP website.

(Washington, D.C) – The Government Accountability Project (GAP) today praised congressional negotiators for passing 2009’s first major whistleblower rights law as part of the $790 billion stimulus spending bill. The final stimulus package includes “best practices” anti-retaliation rights for any workers at recipients of the new federal spending. This includes contractors, grantees, and state and local government employees who work in programs that receive stimulus funding.
 
However, GAP expressed deep frustration at the conferees’ failure to extend whistleblower rights to federal government workers, who are best positioned to keep the spending honest. Senate conferees rejected a key, bi-partisan accountability provision, sponsored by Representatives Chris Van Hollen (D-Md) and Todd Platts (R-Pa), which the House had adopted without dissent.  The Platts/Van Hollen amendment is a much needed overhaul of the federal employee Whistleblower Protection Act. That whistleblower legislation had been approved overwhelmingly by the House in 2007 as well.
 
GAP Legal Director Tom Devine emphasized, “It is not too late for accountability. After nearly ten years of hearings and votes, there is no excuse to spend nearly a trillion dollars without safe passage for federal employees who risk their careers to keep it honest. Congress has more than enough time, though, to finish locking in best practice rights for federal whistleblowers before the money starts getting spent in 120 days. The politicians owe it to the taxpayers.”
 
By contrast, the final stimulus package includes state-of-the-art whistleblower rights for any recipients of the unprecedented spending. GAP Legislative Representative Adam Miles explained, “The stimulus law is a ‘best practices’ blueprint for modern contractor whistleblower rights. This accountability breakthrough for the taxpayers is the result of tireless efforts by Senator Claire McCaskill (D-Mo) and her staff. The Senator wisely recognized that the best means of protecting the taxpayers is to ensure that employees can speak out about waste, fraud and abuse in stimulus spending without fear of retaliation.”
 
The new law offers protection enforced by jury trials for contractor and state or local employees who challenge fraud, waste and abuse. The conferees did not address, however, the issue of state sovereign immunity, which means that the right to a jury trial in federal court by a state employee is uncertain at best.
 
The Government Accountability Project is the nation’s leading whistleblower protection organization. Through litigating whistleblower cases, publicizing concerns and developing legal reforms, GAP’s mission is to protect the public interest by promoting government and corporate accountability. Founded in 1977, GAP is a non-profit, non-partisan advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C. 
 
Dylan Blaylock
Communications Director, Government Accountability Project
202.408.0034 ext. 137; 202.236.3733 (cell)
1612 K. St, #1100   Washington , D.C. 20006
 
Interested in signing up for a daily GAP and whistleblower-focused news roundup? Email
Dylan Blaylock with the subject line “Subscribe” today!

SHAM PEER REVIEW is a “corrective action” proceeding commenced by a hospital medical staff against a physician to discipline the physician motivated by other concerns than the quality of patient concerns – such as hospital politics, competitive advantage or retaliation.  There are twelve telltale signs that individually and collectively may indicate a situation of malicious peer review. Continue reading ‘TWELVE SIGNS OF SHAM PEER REVIEW’