- DALA recommends that the Board impose appropriate discipline where the Board proved that doctor (1) fraudulently procured the renewal of his certificate of registration; (2) practiced medicine while his ability to do so was impaired by drugs; (3) failed to maintain records in accordance with G.L. c. 94C; (4) committed boundary violations; and (5) was guilty of sexual misconduct with a patient.
- that the Conclusions of Law set forth in the Stipulation are warranted and I hereby adopt them.Based on the foregoing, I recommend that the Board imposed such discipline onDr. Cerel as it deems appropriate in light of the facts and conclusions of law stipulated by the parties.
- Doctor accused of practicing medicine without a license who ignored several notices for pre-hearing conferences and refused to respond in writing to Order to Show Cause was defaulted.
- Board of Registration in Medicine’s summary suspension of doctor upheld after hearing based on evidence that doctor performed frequent and medically inadequate breast examinations of two patients.
- The Conclusions of Law set forth in the Stipulation by the parties are warranted and are hereby adopted by the Magistrate.
- Psychiatrist who had responsibility of supervising the practice of psychiatric nurse/mental health clinical specialist did not violate and Board regulation or Prescriptive Practice Protocol when he indicated he could not care for patient due to conflict of interest and referred patient to the clinical director or another staff psychiatrist.
- Board of Registration in Medicine is granted summary decision because doctor’s federal conviction of conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, and health care fraud calls into question his ability to practice medicine and warrants appropriate disciplinary action by the Board
- The Statement of Allegations was not proven. Respondent, when he saw two women in connection with his work as an outside consultant physician addressing their social security disability claims as an internist, did not improperly touch or improperly examine or fondle or squeeze their breasts. He did not make unprofessional comments to them. I found Respondent conducted a proper breast examination as an internist on one of the females and did no breast exam on the other female as she had breast implants. I found no improper touching by Respondent of either woman’s breasts. I found no unprofessional language was used at either examination. I recommend that no discipline be imposed based on these two claims.
People also viewed...
You recently viewed...
Personalization is OFF. Your personal browsing history at Mass.gov is not visible because your personalization is turned off. To view your history, turn your personalization on.
Learn more on our .
*Recommendations are based on site visitor traffic patterns and are not endorsements of that content.