Next Thursday, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts will have a hearing on their 2012 license revocation of abortionist Ann Kristin (Kris) Neuhaus.
They were ordered to review this case (translation: undo the revocation and issue a slap-on-the-wrist penalty) by Shawnee District Court Judge Franklin Theis, ruling on the appeal filed by Neuhaus.
The Board was incensed at the refutation of their authority to revoke, and asked for the state appellate court to intervene, but that support was denied. Instead, they were forced to obey Theis and re-present the case to the Board. In their newest filing,
Board attorneys emphasize this is Neuhaus’ “3rd strike” and her “character is not one that can be rehabilitated.”
The legal issue is Neuhaus’ repeated violations of standard of care, i.e. the baseline professional requirements in assessing the patient, making a diagnosis and committing this data into a written medical file.
The backdrop to the case was that Neuhaus, a failed “circuit-riding” abortionist, had become the integral “rubber stamp” for post-viability abortions performed by infamous (now deceased) Wichita abortionist, George Tiller. The state law at the time banned post-viability abortions without a second opinion from a Kansas- licensed physician verifying that the mother faced “substantial and irreversible” harm. The Board utilized case files obtained by (former) Attorney General Phill Kline of 11 teens who had obtained third trimester abortions in 2003 with Neuhaus’ approval of dire “mental health” conditions.
The Board’s arguments for revocation do not hinge on professional fraud, or the fact that Neuhaus utilized an online ‘psych-profiling’ system to claim grave mental health issues justified those 11 abortions. The Board simply asserts that Neuhaus continues to ignore the essential, legally required written elements for patient intake, evaluation and case history.
It’s a problem that the Board repeatedly disciplined Neuhaus for:
- in 1999 it was multiple cases of her failure to record drug dispensation as required by the federal authorities (DEA);
- in 2001, it included her inability to do proper patient intake, create a proper sedation record, or document the gestational age of the unborn child as required by the Kansas Woman’s Right to Know statutes.
Judge Theis himself acknowledged that Neuhaus’ record-keeping fell below standard of care, but it was his opinion that it didn’t merit revocation.
The Board’s newest filing emphasizes that her deficient medical files were particularly egregious at the time of those eleven abortions, because Neuhaus was still bound by her 2001 formal promise to the Board to “comply with all provisions…of medical record-keeping.”
The Board’s attorneys profile the situation thusly:
“The Board has attempted to remediate and rehabilitate [Neuhaus] to no avail…by her behavior in the two previous actions [her] conduct shows that she believes her way is better than the Board’s…she was given, not one, but two second chances to fix her documentation issues…her character is not one that can be rehabilitated.”
The Board will be presented with this second airing of the case Thursday and then notify Judge Theis of their stand. It’s assumed that the Board will maintain their original revocation and their authority in this matter.