Another Pain Doctor Raided

Saturday, January 15th, 2011

I don’t know any more than what was reported by the local paper. But this editorial sounds familiar:

[M]any of us know Kim Rotchford and his family. Rotchford is known as the physician who has taken into his care people with chronic pain or addictions for which others may have no good answer. He takes cases that others would choose not to take.

He is also the local physician who has put his time and his expertise into the service of our homeless and dispossessed through the founding and volunteer staffing of the JC MASH free medical clinic. Other docs help out, but everyone knows that clinic is the product of Rotchford’s calling to help the down and out.

We know that Rotchford and his family have been good citizens and good volunteers in this community for many years. Without pre-judging the investigative findings, we believe that Rotchford deserves the benefit of doubt from the justice system and from us as he proceeds into the legal ordeal ahead.

Unfortunately, taking cases that others choose not to take is often enough in itself to get yourself investigated. And of course all of Rotchford’s pain patients are now out of luck.

Those of you who think we need more government healthcare might keep in mind that when the feds can’t prove a case for drug distributionthey often fall back on Medicare fraud, which appears to be the impetus for this investigation. That is, they argue that billing Medicare for pain scripts DEA cops don’t think patients need becomes a criminal offense. That kind of intimidation will only get worse with more government oversight.

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

15 Responses to “Another Pain Doctor Raided”

  1. #1 |  Mike H | 

    I guess I have a problem with that last paragraph, given that reports of these types of raids are rare in countries with more liberal attitudes to government-run universal heathcare. Let’s not cloud the issue – overreach by the DEA and local SWAT teams are the true culprits here.

  2. #2 |  Anthony | 

    @1 The problem is government involvement in the treatment of pain, not involvement by the wrong government agencies.

  3. #3 |  Sam | 

    Agree with Mike H. and Anthony, no need to throw the baby out with the bath water. This is another effect of the Drug War you cover quite well, not ‘government healthcare’.

  4. #4 |  Mike H | 

    There will always be some form of bureaucratic oversight in the treatment of pain, whether it’s hospital care, private hospices, medical mj or methadone clinics.

    Obviously, this oversight should be limited to medically literate experts, and not subject to interference from whatever branch of government (FBI, DEA, DOJ) seeking autonomy over our bloodstreams.

  5. #5 |  Dave | 

    Licensing the practice of medicine has created a system where all treatment must be uniformly bland and only marginally effective.
    Bureaucrats practicing medicine without a license is the face of the State laid bare, no reason, no compassion, just a desire to dominate and the willingness to use brute force without any remorse.

  6. #6 |  Old Fart | 

    [overreach by the DEA and local SWAT teams are the true culprits here.]

    No. The DEA and local SWAT teams didn’t decide to investigate or to raid… an elected state bureacrat made those decisions.

  7. #7 |  Bambam | 

    From page 13 of “The Most Dangerous Superstition” by Larken Rose

    I do not know Mr. Rose nor am I selling his wares. My motivation is to spread the message in his book and eradicate this belief in The State, government, authority, etc. that is destroying humanity.

    “Lawmakers”: There is a strange paradox involved in the concept of “lawmakers,” in that they are perceived to have the right to give commands, impose “taxes”, regulate behavior, and otherwise coercively control people, but only if they do so via the “legislative” process. The people in “government” legislatures are seen as having the right to rule, but only if they exert their supposed “authority” by way of certain accepted political rituals. When they do, the “lawmakers” are imagined to have the right to give commands and hire people to enforce them, in situations where normal individuals would have no such right. To put it another way, the general public honestly imagines that morality is different for “lawmakers” than it is for everyone else.
    [text omitted]
    “Law Enforcement”: one of the most common examples of “authority,” which many people see on a daily basis, are the people who wear the label of “police” or “law enforcement.” The behavior of “law enforcers,” and the way they are regarded and treated by others, shows quite plainly that they are viewed not simply as people, but as representatives of “authority,” to which very different standards of morality are believed to apply.
    [text omitted]
    They are judged by how well they enforce “the law” rather than by whether their individual actions conform to the normal standards of right and wrong that apply to everyone else. The difference is voiced by the “law enforcers” themselves, who often defend their actions by saying things such as “I don’t make the law, I just enforce it.” Clearly, they expect to be judged only by how faithfully they carry out the will of the “lawmakers,” rather than by whether they behave like civilized, rational human beings.

  8. #8 |  OBTC | 

    Great post BamBam.

  9. #9 |  Mattocracy | 

    “Those of you who think we need more government healthcare might keep in mind that when the feds can’t prove a case for drug distribution they often fall back on Medicare fraud…”

    More laws=more criminals.

  10. #10 |  Mattocracy | 

    @#1 | Mike H |

    Can you cite something that shows that more liberal countries don’t behave in this manner?

    Not trying to be confrontational, just wondering if anyone has actually done the research.

  11. #11 |  Lee B | 

    I think the book “1984” was pretty darn accurate. Big Brother is “taking care” of us. My foot! Big Brother is sticking his nose in places where he has no business. This should be between the doctor and his patient — that’s all. No one else need be involved unless something tragic happens — then EVERYONE gets involved.

  12. #12 |  Gordon | 

    I’d have to also disagree that this really links to government health care (which I oppose on other grounds).

    It’s an extension — almost a caricaturization — of the Drug War credo that any drug which might make someone feel better (except alcohol, but only if not mixed with a caffeinated beverage) is BAD! EVIL! The Very Work of the Devil (sm)! and must be eradicated using any and all means necessary (or which engorge the phallusii of authoritarians).

    The Drug War is only one of the ways in which the totalitarian vision of all authoritarians is revealed, but it is certainly among the most violent and the direct cause of the most pain, suffering, and death.

  13. #13 |  Bill Anderson | 

    Well, let’s hear it for Progressivism. Once people come to believe that government should make decisions for them, this is what we get.

    Thanks for fighting the Good Fight, Radley. I’m trying to do the same on my end.

  14. #14 |  Alas, a blog | 

    […] reading: The vindictive grand jury investigation of pain-relief advocate Siobhan Reynolds, and Another Pain Doctor Raided, both by Radley […]

  15. #15 |  Check the Facts | 

    Always two sides to the story. Aiding addicts with synthetic heroin and calling it pain management isn’t therapeutic medicine.