Oral arguments were heard in Wrangell’s courtroom Tuesday afternoon regarding local physician Greg Salard’s request to be allowed to work at the Wrangell Medical Center (WMC) pending his appeal to a previous hospital board decision.
The WMC Board notified Salard in early March that his request for permanent privileges at the hospital had been denied.
Salard is employed through Alaska Island Community Services and was previously contracted to practice at WMC on a temporary basis.
A week after the March 2 WMC Board decision, Salard filed an appeal in court. He also requested he be allowed to see patients at the hospital’s emergency room and long-term care facility pending the court’s decision on that appeal.
Salard’s attorney Lee Holen phoned in to the court process Tuesday as did WMC’s attorneys Stephen Rose and Roger Hillman.
Holen maintained that Salard will suffer “irreparable harm” if not allowed to practice at WMC.
She said it will cause damage to Salard’s reputation, force he and his family to relocate out of Wrangell, “blemish” his professional credentials and harm his future employability.
“We think the record is clear that he will suffer not only financial loss, but also irreparable harm,” Holen said.
Holen also said she disagrees with WMC’s claim in its responses filed in court that the hospital would be the one to suffer harm should Salard be reinstated at WMC.
She said the hospital’s argument that having Salard back at the hospital would delay WMC from hiring the physician’s permanent replacement is not relevant. Holen said it has not been customary for WMC to hire physicians, but the responsibility of AICS.
AICS requires it’s physicians to maintain privileges at the hospital, which Holen said means Salard only has a limited amount of time to remain employed as a doctor in Wrangell.
Holen also argued WMC has failed to provide evidence that shows having Salard back on staff would harm patients, or disrupt the care environment at the hospital.
“There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Salard poses a realistic or recognizable threat to patient care,” Holen said.
A main argument stressed by Holen Tuesday was that the WMC Board’s decision to deny Salard hospital privileges seems to be based on five complaints from WMC staff and patients, beginning in 2009. But, there have been no complaints about Salard in nearly a year, Holen said.
“Here’s the point, there have been no complaints of any sort since April of 2011…” Holen said. “So there is no evidence of any current problem.”
Holen also maintained that the WMC Board’s decision regarding Salard’s hospital privileging is “arbitrary, unreasonable and capricious.”
“It’s just totally unprecedented to deny a physician privileges with evidence such as the hospital has provided,” she said.
Nearly 30 people gathered in the courtroom to hear the oral arguments. Salard was in attendance. No representative from WMC was present, other than the hospital’s attorneys on the phone.
WMC’s attorney Rose spoke on behalf of the hospital, and disagreed with Holen’s arguments discrediting the possible harm to WMC should Salard be allowed to work at the hospital.
“Harm can come to [WMC] if Dr. Salard is allowed to maintain his privileges,” Rose said.
First, Rose said, is the harm that it could cause patients. Salard and Holen’s attempt to “sweep away” any possibility of harm to patient care is “quite breathtaking,” Rose said. The patient complaints are serious, he said, and some have said they will not come to be treated at the hospital if Salard is the physician on duty.
“[That] presents a really big problem in respect to patient care,” Rose said.
Having Salard back on staff at the hospital also poses a threat to WMC staff, Rose said, as those that have filed a complaint against the physician clearly felt threatened by him.
He said Salard has failed to prove that he will suffer irreparable harm. Rose also said Salard would not suffer harm to his reputation as a doctor during the appeal process because WMC has already agreed it would not report Salard to any credentialing agencies until the appeal case is concluded.
Salard’s request to work at the hospital pending the decision on his appeal is not necessary, as the appeal process is already “moving forward,” Rose said.
“This is not a case that will take six or eight months or a year until we get to a final decision,” Rose said.
Alaska Superior Court Kevin G. Miller was not present in Wrangell Tuesday, but on the phone. He said he would review the arguments made by both sides before issuing a final decision on Salard’s motion for a stay pending his appeal.
“I do want to give these matters some careful attention,” Miller said. “I do have some research I have to do. It is not going to be an immediate decision, but I will exercise my best effort to get a decision out as soon as possible.”
Reader Comments(0)