The Associated Press reported Friday that Board President Gary Counselman said Board members were “very uncomfortable proceeding at this point,” because members didn’t receive copies of 70 pages of previously submitted legal arguments from Neuhaus’ attorneys until Thursday afternoon. They wanted more time to review them.
The petition to revoke, filed in April of 2010, “accuses Neuhaus of negligence in conducting mental health exams for 11 patients, ages 10 to 18, who terminated pregnancies from July to November 2003,” according to the Associated Press’s John Hanna.
“Neuhaus diagnosed the patients with acute anxiety, acute stress or single episodes of major depression, concluding their conditions met requirements in Kansas law for late-term abortions.” However, state law required independent referrals to verify that such abortions were obtained only to prevent the death of, or irreversible and substantial injury to, the mother.
All the 11 young women were in their sixth or seventh month of pregnancy when they met with Neuhaus at the Tiller facility. Neuhaus was never trained as a psychiatric consultant, and ended up utilizing an online ‘answer tree.’
Evidence from the patient files repeatedly indicated such diagnoses were logged in and completed within 2 to 3 minutes.
Thus the teens were able to secure these abortion at a cost of $6,000 or more.
Hearings in September and November 2011, under administrative hearing officer Edward Gashler, resulted in an order to revoke Neuhaus’ medical license for failure to follow the standard of care. The order needed final approval by the Board of Healing Arts to go into effect.
Neuhaus supporters have claimed she was being railroaded by conservative forces under Gov. Sam Brownback. But, in truth, the formal petition to revoke her license was issued before his election, under a Board administration put in place under pro-abortion governors. Even now Gov. Brownback has selected only three members of the 15 member board. The latest delay is just the most recent example that there is no unfair “rush” to revoke Neuhaus’s license.
Neuhaus also faces a separate disciplinary action from the Board relating to employment omissions and discrepancies they have found in her annual license renewal filings.
The Board is using due diligence and pro-lifers have confidence that this small snag is not indicative that the Board will backpedal–as they did in the past.