Welcome to HCV Advocate’s hepatitis blog. The intent of this blog is to keep our website audience up-to-date on information about hepatitis and to answer some of our web site and training audience questions. People are encouraged to submit questions and post comments.

For more information on how to use this blog
click here, the HCV drug pipeline click here, and for more information on HCV clinical trials click here

Be sure to check out our other blogs: The HBV Advocate Blog and Hepatitis & Tattoos.

Alan Franciscus
Editor-in-Chief
HCV Advocate
HBV Advocate

Thursday, September 15, 2011

NJ doctor loses license after hepatitis B outbreak

New Jersey officials have revoked the medical license of an oncologist they say committed "gross and repeated acts of negligence" that led to an outbreak of hepatitis B among his patients.

The Star-Ledger newspaper  reports that the state Board of Medical Examiners on Wednesday revoked Parvez Dara's license for four years and charged him $30,000 in civil penalties. His license already had been suspended for 2 1/2 years, meaning he can reapply in 18 months.

1 comment:

  1. Hi Alan,

    Outbreaks such as these are a most serious breach of trust between a doctor and a community. However, in this case, the state of New Jersey led a deeply flawed investigation and blamed an innocent man, all based on an anonymous call from a former employee with a criminal record.

    What the Star Ledger failed to report is that prior to the board's decision, the Office of Administrative Law exonerated Dr. Dara of causing harm to his patients and further found his practice was not proven to be the source of the Hepatitis B outbreak. The judge did find him culpable for lax supervision of his staff members, which in his view did not warrant further suspension of his license. The full decision can be found here: http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/bds02624-09_1.html

    The NJ Board of Medical Examiners with pressure from the Attorney General's office chose to dismiss the judge's findings - based on thousands of pages of testimony from six months of hearings - and instead offered their own opinion of what happened. The Board's decision was based not on the merits of the case, but on a need to have an excuse for interrupting patient care for hundreds of patients afflicted with or recovering from various forms of cancer.

    More here: http://www.friendsofdrdara.com/

    ReplyDelete