I have opined much of late concerning the scope of practice lawsuit filed by the Texas Meddlesome ASSn, er…Texas Medical Association, against the Board of Chiropractic Examiners. After digging deeper, I find that there have other, almost equally silly abuses of the court system with regard to these turf wars.
http://www.tpj.org/docs/1998/10/reports/pacs/health.html
“
The largest specialty physician PAC was the Texas Opthalmological Association�s Eye PAC ($283,784). Opthalmologists have waged a long turf war with optometrists. The Texas Optometric PAC along with three local chapters spent $548,038. In the 1997 legislative session, this PAC unsuccessfully sought to expand its members� practices to include procedures now reserved for opthalmologists.
Similarly, the Texas Dental Association ($511,970) and the Texas Chiropractic Association ($139,706) perennially seek expanded insurance coverage of their practices and chiropractors also have waged turf wars with physical therapists and physicians.”
October 20, 2006
Precedent on these “scope of practice” suits in Texas
“Texas Orthopaedic Association v. Texas State Board of Podiatric Medicine
This “scope of practice” suit challenges the validity of a regulation adopted by the Texas State Board of Podiatric Medicine (“TSBPM”) to define the “foot” as including the ankle. More technically, the “foot” is defined to include “the tibia and fibula in their articulation with the talus … inclusive of all soft tissues … that insert into the tibia and fibula in their articulation with the talus.”
The Texas podiatric statute uses the word “foot” to describe podiatrists’ scope of practice but does not define the word. The Texas Attorney General formally opined that the TSBPM had exceeded its statutory authority, because the foot does not include the tibia or fibula. The Texas Orthopaedic Association (“TOA”) and the Texas Medical Association (“TMA”) then brought suit to declare the TSBPM regulation inconsistent with the statute.
Without giving a reason, the trial judge upheld the contested regulation. TOA and TMA have appealed that ruling. The briefing is ongoing.
The Texas Podiatric Medical Association sued TOA, the TMA, and the TOA president, claiming that they had violated the Texas antitrust laws by urging hospitals to refuse to credential podiatrists to treat diseases of or injuries to the ankle.
The Litigation Center has contributed to TOA’s legal expenses in this protracted litigation. Also, on April 7, 2006, the Litigation Center filed an amicus brief, along with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the Texas chapters of several specialty medical societies, to support TOA and TMA.”
WHAT A COLLOSAL WASTE OF TIME.
What if every competitor sued his or her competitor to try to eliminate the competition?
All this is , is an effort to eliminate the competition, and for the TMA to sue the Chiropractic Board, is a shame. They should be ashamed of themselves.
