Posted by AL-05 Republican nominee Wayne Parker hit the airwaves at the end of last week, following up on the controversy of the 20 year old review of Huntsville Hospital’s Oncology Department, which then included Dr. Parker Griffith, that surfaced last week. Parker Griffith is the Democratic nominee for the seat.
You can see the ad here in .rm format.
The ad refers viewers to griffithdocs.com which, at this writing, directly steers your browser to the .pdf file of the review and opens up your .pdf reader if you have one.
(I always like a warning before my browser starts to open up a .pdf file. Am I the only one?)
Related Articles:
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Gregory W. Cotter, MD, FACRO
I have read the press releases and news stories regarding Dr. Parker Griffith and the reviews of the Radiation Oncology Department at Huntsville Hospital that were conducted by Dr. Luther Brady and later by Dr. Carlos Perez. I am familiar with the reports from Dr. Brady and Dr. Perez and am appalled that confidential peer review material from Huntsville Hospital was released to the public. I was a part of the Radiation Oncology Department at Huntsville Hospital during the time in question and some of my charts were reviewed as well. While this report should have never been released, I have nothing to hide and neither does Dr. Griffith.
Let me start by saying I no longer live in Huntsville and left in 1986 to practice in Mobile. I do not vote in north Alabama and have no political allegiance to either candidate. I did not even know Dr. Griffith was running for Congress until the news media contacted me this morning to discuss the peer review documents. What I can do is shed some light on what appears to be nothing but a horrible political attack upon a fine individual and a complete miss-use, and perhaps illegal use, of the reviews conducted by Dr. Brady and Dr. Perez.
I can speak to all of this because I was there and know the whole story. Not only can I speak to this issue since I was there, but also because I currently serve as Director of the nation’s largest radiation oncology accreditation organization. In this capacity I deal with proper peer review and standards of care daily on a national basis. What occurred at Huntsville Hospital was purely retaliatory bad faith peer review. This occurred because Dr. Griffith built his own cancer center, when Huntsville Hospital lost revenue. What is lost in all of this is that Dr. Griffith should have been hailed as a hero for providing better cancer care for the community rather than having the scorn of Huntsville Hospital leadership directed at him.
The events covered in these documents occurred over 20 years ago and took place in a very dysfunctional atmosphere caused by a continuing rift between Huntsville Hospital and Dr. Griffith. While I was not a partner or associated with Dr. Griffith’s Huntsville Cancer Treatment Center I know personally that the leadership at Huntsville Hospital viewed him as a competitive threat and this created a very bad environment in the hospital’s radiation oncology department. Unfortunately, this influenced many decisions made by the Hospital leadership at the time. To say that the business aspect of this dispute was at times allowed to interfere with the effective operation of the Department and led to a desire by the Hospital leadership to “get Griffith” would be true.
I practiced alongside Dr. Griffith and can say with certainty that he was not only a qualified physician but a great doctor. He practiced with the highest standards of care, provided the highest quality of care for his patients and was professional in his dealings with other physicians. Any suggestion or insinuation to the contrary is simply not true. To use the limited chart reviews included in these reports to make such ca claim is not only inaccurate and inappropriate but also completely dishonest in my view.
In fact, most of the charts reviewed in these reports were not Dr. Griffith’s. Likewise, the carts with questionable patient care were those of another physician, not Dr. Griffith. Further, the full records of patient care were not provided to Dr. Brady or Dr. Perez for review. These details were not included in the summary reports of Dr. Brady or Dr. Perez that were released to the public. This is why peer review documents of this type should not be released to the public particularly in a political campaign.
Consequently the press releases that have followed and statements from some like NRCC spokesman Brendan Buck are wholly inaccurate and grossly inappropriate. Frankly, individuals like Mr. Buck owe Dr. Griffith an apology in my opinion.
In closing, I cannot begin to say how troubled I am that these events and the reviews conducted over 20 years ago are being used in this manner. What is being said by his political opponents is inaccurate and their assertions are not backed up by any facts or by the content of these two reports. I hope that the people of North Alabama see through this totally baseless attack and listen to the facts from physicians like me that saw Dr. Griffith work. He is an outstanding man of great courage how always stood up for his patients. The Huntsville community should be proud to have a man of his character in the currant Congressional election.
Sincerely,
Gregory W. Cotter, MD, FACRO
Wow! Now that is a great postings.
I agree with Willie, I wish there was more postings with substance and less of the same old bickering back and forth.
where there is smoke there is fire…
The shady part of Dr. Cotter’s letter says that the charts in question were not Dr. Griffith’s. This begs the question – how could Griffith not know that there were patients not being treated properly? Of course he know, doctors fill in for each other all the time. So the next question is, if these are not Griffith’s patients (which is impossible to answer completely since patient records are confidential), then why did Griffith stand by and do nothing???? And instead sue the hospital over some lie about “anti-trust” or whatever baloney is spewing out of his mouth. I want the truth!!!!!
pretty sure cotter didn’t post that, considering it is a readily available letter that can be found on Griffith’s website – staffers at it again…
Yeah I assumed it was a cut and paste job. Where is the Huntsville Times article that talks about the “breathtaking” criminal nature of Griffith’s patient care? That is a far more reliable doctor than this lone Cotter guy, considering the doctor quoted in the Times is ultimately implicating himself, too, for allowing a white-collar (or white coat, if you want to call it that) criminal Griffith to walk away from his medical practice without taking his license away.
The doctor in the Huntsville Times, Williams, is not an oncologist and lost his personal practice. He is now an ER doctor at the worst hospital in the state. Dr. Cotter is Chair of the Oncology Dept. at the University of South Alabama and Chair of the standards cmte. for the American College of Radiation Oncologists. I think the two doctors records (and credibility) speak for themselves. As for me, I am listening to Dr. Cotter.
#8, that’s your choice. Think this voter will listen to the 3 docs who say griffith was a greedy sob, vs the 1 (cotter) that talked to griffith before he gave the first comment
A late night joke waiting to happen – a shady doctor who resigns his job and then owns funeral homes.
#9 — I think voters are worried about the economy.
Wayne Parker is truly pathetic. He is beneath the office he seeks. He thouroughly deserves rejection – again.
Revolting.
Hmmm… Griffith, who had a fundraiser from the same speaker of the house who could not convince enough people to vote for the bailout package is a real strong contender for helping us steer through a financial mess. Great idea #11. Should we add some more dem-advised subprime mortgages in the mix for good measure?
Do you really trust Wayne Parker with the economy? Wayne Parker is incompetent on the economy. Parker Griffith is a conservative blue dog who will demand fiscal responsibility. Wayne Parker . . . wouldn’t know who to follow.
Yes, I do trust Wayne more than Griffith. Griffith will have no power and will be beholden to his party, blue dog or not, the letter next to his name is still a big fat capital D. Griffith is not a conservative, he has been quoting the Pelosi tag line that the domestic drilling will only save pennies in the long run. He’s also been mum on whether he supports Obama’s proposed taxpayer-paid expanded health care system. No thanks Griffith.
Blue Dogs are not conservative nor independent as shown in their voting records. They carry the party line time and time again. It is only used as cover when they come back to their districts and run for election. Get over the idea that is means something.
Bud Cramer = Parker Griffith. If you did not like Bud Cramer, you probably won’t like Parker Griffith. But if you think Bud Cramer took the right approach for North Alabama, you will love Parker Griffith.
Parker Griffith supports drilling everywhere. He just knows that it is going to take more than drilling, it is goin to take a comprehensive approach. Does Wayne Parker really believe that we don’t need to try other approaches in addition to more drilling?
18, stupid must be in the water where you live. of course wayne parker supports alternative sources, and has said as much.
I don’t see parker griffith as being a bud cramer.
Bud Cramer thinks so.
Of course he does….he wants another dem.
Your Son If Fine.
My Vote Is Yours.
Ily(: