John Graham:
While I agree with her probation and stayed revocation for what she did, I don't think Charlene Anderson should be a member of the Board until she has successfully completed her probation. Nurses are held to a very high standard and members of the State Board of Registered Nursing should be even more squeaky clean. It is not fair to the thousands of of other nurses who somehow find the time to get their charting properly done even when they are busy or understaffed. If she is as wonderful a nurse as many have commented, then she needs to do the right thing and resign from the Board in order avoid the appearance of corruption and double standard for members of the governing Board in her profession. I have seen many fine nurses in this state fired or had their licenses revoked for much less.
"...The state nursing board voted Thursday to accept the recommendation of an administrative judge to revoke her license, then stay the revocation and place her on probation... The board hands down stayed revocations to about 100 of the state’s 390,000 registered nurses each year.
"Anderson’s “failure to document the disposition of narcotics is a very serious matter,” Walker wrote. “'If she did not administer the medications to patients, she created a potential for harm by depriving them of prescribed medications. If she did administer the medications to patients, she created a potential for harm by creating a risk for over-medication.'”
Tri-City official gets probation as nurse
Three-year penalty stems from undocumented drugs
Aaron Burgin
SDUT
Nov. 18, 2011
The state Board of Registered Nursing has put Tri-City Healthcare District board member Charlene Anderson on three years probation for failing to account for prescription painkillers while she worked at Scripps Memorial Hospital in Encinitas in 2006.
Anderson, who was elected to the Tri-City board in 2008, was accused of failure to account for 23 Percocet tablets, seven Vicodin tablets and three tablets of Tylenol with codeine removed from a hospital dispensing machine from May to August of that year. Scripps fired Anderson a month later.
Anderson, 61, expressed regret for the incident in a prepared statement and said she would not step down from the board.
“I regret my apparent lack of complete documentation five years ago at Scripps when after correctly removing medications ... and correctly administering them to the patients, I apparently did not complete documentations on the chart in some cases,” she said. “My patients were not and have not ever been harmed and my nursing practice has been enhanced by this negative experience.
“Am I going to resign? Absolutely not. I did nothing wrong that affects my tenure on the Tri-City board,” she said.
The state nursing board voted Thursday to accept the recommendation of an administrative judge to revoke her license, then stay the revocation and place her on probation.
That action is one step short of outright revocation, said a spokesman with the state Department of Consumer Affairs, which oversees the nursing board. The board hands down stayed revocations to about 100 of the state’s 390,000 registered nurses each year.
The judge in the proceeding, Robert Walker, said that while Anderson’s actions were very serious, there was no evidence that patients were harmed by her actions. He noted that she had a nearly complaint-free record in her 20 years as a registered nurse.
Walker also noted that Anderson was not accused of taking the drugs or failing to give them to patients — just not properly charting them. [Maura Larkins comment: It would be next to impossible to find out what happened to those pills. The state didn't find Anderson innocent of consuming the drugs; it just couldn't prove anything, so it didn't charge her. “If she did not administer the medications to patients, she created a potential for harm by depriving them of prescribed medications. If she did administer the medications to patients, she created a potential for harm by creating a risk for over-medication...On the other hand, there is no evidence that (Anderson) actually harmed any patient,” Walker wrote.]
Anderson’s “failure to document the disposition of narcotics is a very serious matter,” Walker wrote. “If she did not administer the medications to patients, she created a potential for harm by depriving them of prescribed medications. If she did administer the medications to patients, she created a potential for harm by creating a risk for over-medication.”
“On the other hand, there is no evidence that (Anderson) actually harmed any patient,” Walker wrote. [Maura Larkins comment: Whew! Both Charlene and her patients were lucky that no harm occurred.]
Walker denied the state’s request to recover $46,456 from Anderson as restitution for investigation costs. The judge said the state did not properly substantiate its costs.
The State Attorney General’s office filed the administrative complaint against Anderson in January 2010, four years after the incidents occurred.
A four-day administrative hearing akin to a criminal trial was held in July. Anderson’s attorney argued that she wasn’t able to chart the medication because the hospital’s postpartum unit, where Anderson worked, was too busy and understaffed.
State authorities alleged that understaffing was not an excuse.
As part of her probation, Anderson must submit to mental health and psychiatric testing after Walker expressed concern that Anderson knew the rules and still failed to abide by them.
“Is there a medical problem that caused her to forget to do things she intended to do?” Walker wrote. “Because the evidence suggests these concerns, protection of the public requires that there be a professional assessment of the respondent’s ability to practice safely.”..
Showing posts with label . Anderson (Charlene Anderson). Show all posts
Showing posts with label . Anderson (Charlene Anderson). Show all posts
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Friday, November 18, 2011
When doctors rely on attorneys who lie: Tri-City Healthcare attorney contradicts her own witness
The tale of the out-of-control Andersons (CEO Larry and board member Charlene--no relation) and their odd little co-conspirators continues at Tri-City Hospital.
Paralegal says Tri-City report is wrong
She balks at hospital's version of events involving board member Kathleen Sterling
Aaron Burgin
San Diego Union-Tribune
Nov. 17, 2011
Oceanside — In making their case that elected Tri-City Healthcare District board member Kathleen Sterling should remain excluded from closed session meetings for the rest of her term, administrators cited what they considered traitorous activity.
At a meeting last month, Tri-City attorney Allison Borkenheim offered a sworn affidavit saying that paralegal Linda Elsner informed district officials that Sterling in 2003 or 2004 divulged confidential information to her law office, which was suing the district.
In response to the report, the public hospital board voted 5-1 to keep excluding Sterling from closed session, where issues such as CEO Larry Anderson’s performance and the strategic direction of the hospital are discussed.
The Watchdog contacted Elsner to verify Tri-City’s statements. Elsner said Tri-City officials misrepresented what she said — that she specifically told them Sterling shared only public information.
“How can they get away with this?” Elsner said. “How can they say I said these things and put them out as fact when I didn’t say them?”
Tri-City officials declined to be interviewed and issued a statement that they stand by Borkenheim’s affidavit and the belief that Sterling divulged confidential information to Elsner.
“The accounting set forth information provided by Linda Elsner, which she reported to at least four individuals in separate conversations, that Kathleen Sterling actively provided assistance to parties directly involved in legal matters against Tri-City Medical Center,” the statement said.
“Kathleen Sterling received information, some of which was confidential, while she was a member of the board. Under the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act, information deemed to be confidential is expected to remain confidential, and not arbitrarily made public at any point, unless the board authorizes its release. Ms. Sterling used that information to aid parties in litigation against the hospital.”
Elsner worked for personal injury lawyer Jennifer Lynch, who was pressing an ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit against Tri-City on behalf of patient Thomas Corelis over a surgery.
Elsner said she met Sterling while working on the Corelis case at the Vista courthouse. Sterling approached her and asked her if she was doing work on a lawsuit against Tri-City. When Elsner said yes, Sterling said she could give her information that could help.
Sterling later met with the attorney and pointed her in the direction of a report by the Joint Commission, an accreditation agency, on Tri-City.
Reached Thursday, Sterling confirmed that she gave public information to the plaintiff’s legal team at the time — when she was not a board member — in the hopes it would improve care at the hospital.
“I never gave them anything confidential,” she said.
Elsner said that this year, a former intern at her law firm mentioned the encounter to Charles Perez, the president of Tri-City business partner Medical Acquisition Co.
For months, Elsner said, Perez and Tri-City officials sought her cooperation in their ongoing probe of Sterling for alleged disloyalty to the hospital.
On April 25, Elsner said, she received a call from the former intern, again asking for information. Elsner said she told her that it was not a good time to contact her because she was going through personal and financial issues, including a car that needed the engine replaced, which would cost $3,000.
“She said, ‘Charlie could help you out, right?’” Elsner said. “And then Charles said, ‘Of course. All we need you to do is talk to these people and tell them what you know about Sterling.’”
Elsner said she did not accept any money. She said she told her story to District Attorney’s investigators, who took no action on a Tri-City complaint against Sterling regarding the incident. The DA’s office declined to comment.
Perez told The Watchdog, “My company had a professional relationship to Ms. Elsner for a couple of years and appreciated her law firm business referrals. I have never offered Ms. Elsner any money to break attorney-client privileges. My only involvement at the meeting was to introduce Ms. Elsner to Tri-City.”
Elsner said that on May 3, she met with Anderson, Borkenheim and Perez — the meeting Borkenheim described in her affidavit. Lynch, Elsner’s boss, attended by speaker phone.
Contacted for this story, Lynch corroborated Elsner’s account that Tri-City officials were told Sterling divulged no confidential information to them.
Borkenheim’s affidavit says she strongly believes that Sterling helped Elsner with other cases against Tri-City.
“I believe this because Ms. Elsner, when recounting discussions with Ms. Sterling to me said ‘in the first case...’ leading me to believe that there were other cases or matters in which Ms. Sterling sought to give or gave assistance,” the affidavit says.
Elsner told The Watchdog that’s not so. According to Elsner and a records search by The Watchdog, her law office had no other cases against Tri-City.
Paralegal says Tri-City report is wrong
She balks at hospital's version of events involving board member Kathleen Sterling
Aaron Burgin
San Diego Union-Tribune
Nov. 17, 2011
Oceanside — In making their case that elected Tri-City Healthcare District board member Kathleen Sterling should remain excluded from closed session meetings for the rest of her term, administrators cited what they considered traitorous activity.
At a meeting last month, Tri-City attorney Allison Borkenheim offered a sworn affidavit saying that paralegal Linda Elsner informed district officials that Sterling in 2003 or 2004 divulged confidential information to her law office, which was suing the district.
In response to the report, the public hospital board voted 5-1 to keep excluding Sterling from closed session, where issues such as CEO Larry Anderson’s performance and the strategic direction of the hospital are discussed.
The Watchdog contacted Elsner to verify Tri-City’s statements. Elsner said Tri-City officials misrepresented what she said — that she specifically told them Sterling shared only public information.
“How can they get away with this?” Elsner said. “How can they say I said these things and put them out as fact when I didn’t say them?”
Tri-City officials declined to be interviewed and issued a statement that they stand by Borkenheim’s affidavit and the belief that Sterling divulged confidential information to Elsner.
“The accounting set forth information provided by Linda Elsner, which she reported to at least four individuals in separate conversations, that Kathleen Sterling actively provided assistance to parties directly involved in legal matters against Tri-City Medical Center,” the statement said.
“Kathleen Sterling received information, some of which was confidential, while she was a member of the board. Under the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act, information deemed to be confidential is expected to remain confidential, and not arbitrarily made public at any point, unless the board authorizes its release. Ms. Sterling used that information to aid parties in litigation against the hospital.”
Elsner worked for personal injury lawyer Jennifer Lynch, who was pressing an ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit against Tri-City on behalf of patient Thomas Corelis over a surgery.
Elsner said she met Sterling while working on the Corelis case at the Vista courthouse. Sterling approached her and asked her if she was doing work on a lawsuit against Tri-City. When Elsner said yes, Sterling said she could give her information that could help.
Sterling later met with the attorney and pointed her in the direction of a report by the Joint Commission, an accreditation agency, on Tri-City.
Reached Thursday, Sterling confirmed that she gave public information to the plaintiff’s legal team at the time — when she was not a board member — in the hopes it would improve care at the hospital.
“I never gave them anything confidential,” she said.
Elsner said that this year, a former intern at her law firm mentioned the encounter to Charles Perez, the president of Tri-City business partner Medical Acquisition Co.
For months, Elsner said, Perez and Tri-City officials sought her cooperation in their ongoing probe of Sterling for alleged disloyalty to the hospital.
On April 25, Elsner said, she received a call from the former intern, again asking for information. Elsner said she told her that it was not a good time to contact her because she was going through personal and financial issues, including a car that needed the engine replaced, which would cost $3,000.
“She said, ‘Charlie could help you out, right?’” Elsner said. “And then Charles said, ‘Of course. All we need you to do is talk to these people and tell them what you know about Sterling.’”
Elsner said she did not accept any money. She said she told her story to District Attorney’s investigators, who took no action on a Tri-City complaint against Sterling regarding the incident. The DA’s office declined to comment.
Perez told The Watchdog, “My company had a professional relationship to Ms. Elsner for a couple of years and appreciated her law firm business referrals. I have never offered Ms. Elsner any money to break attorney-client privileges. My only involvement at the meeting was to introduce Ms. Elsner to Tri-City.”
Elsner said that on May 3, she met with Anderson, Borkenheim and Perez — the meeting Borkenheim described in her affidavit. Lynch, Elsner’s boss, attended by speaker phone.
Contacted for this story, Lynch corroborated Elsner’s account that Tri-City officials were told Sterling divulged no confidential information to them.
Borkenheim’s affidavit says she strongly believes that Sterling helped Elsner with other cases against Tri-City.
“I believe this because Ms. Elsner, when recounting discussions with Ms. Sterling to me said ‘in the first case...’ leading me to believe that there were other cases or matters in which Ms. Sterling sought to give or gave assistance,” the affidavit says.
Elsner told The Watchdog that’s not so. According to Elsner and a records search by The Watchdog, her law office had no other cases against Tri-City.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Board of Nursing complaint against Tri-City Healthcare board member Charlene Anderson
Two of the Tri-City Healthcare board members are in line to have their licenses revoked, but these are NOT the two board members banned from closed-door meetings. It would seem that the wrong people are running the show.
Here's the June 2011 complaint against Charlene Anderson.
Also, the Board of Nursing has an action against another Tri-City board member, George Coulter.
Here's the June 2011 complaint against Charlene Anderson.
Also, the Board of Nursing has an action against another Tri-City board member, George Coulter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)