In Los Angeles a dentist is on trial facing felony child abuse charges
because of an adverse reaction while having dental treatment with chloral
hydrate sedation.

This case presents a problem for all in the health care community because the
definition of felony child abuse, as stated by the judge in the preliminary
hearing, was placing a child in a situation with a probability of harm, and
knowing what the consequences are even if no harm occurs.

Expert witnesses for the dentist include Dr. Stanley Malamed, and Dr. John
Yagiela. Dr. Malamed is renown for his work in dental anesthesia and having
written so much on the topic and being a professor on the staff at USC School
of Dentistry, when he takes a case it should cause people to take note.

Dr. Yagiela is on staff at UCLA School and Dentistry and is considered the
equal of Dr. Malamed in this field.

But what is important is that the AAPD as called this case the defining case
for the health care profession because the state wants this case to be used
as the test case for future criminal prosecution.

There is a very fine line that we are approaching if doctors are so fearful
for how they practice and the legal repercussions that we may lose many fine
health care providers.

My background is that I have worked with the state in the past to get
convictions, arrests, fines and license revocations from dentists and groups
that were harmful to patients.

To be on the dentist's side means that I have found that no laws have been
broken and that standards have been followed. And we must also be aware that
if a state can bully a person with criminal charges that we all fall into
jeopardy.

I have not really cared in the past if the law went beyond their bounds in
catching a criminal and getting a conviction because I wanted that person out
of society, but one must question if the state will bend and break so many
rules to get a health care provider if other problems exist, and when one has
to deal with trust, has that trust been shattered in this case.

The prosecution has rested in this case and the defense is expected to take
about 2 weeks, so a result should be forth coming.

If you have an interest in this case I will answer questions as it relates to
health care providers.

If you are a patient that has been harmed by an incompetent doctor and
question why I am on the defense side in this case I would be happy to have a
dialogue with you and answer your questions as well.

I have heard several stories from patients or loved ones that have been
harmed and from I have heard the doctors in those letters to me should have
the license to practice revoked at minimum.

But I also hope that as we get into this arena that we all keep an open mind
and allow the facts to come forth so that we do not have a rush to judgment
that could have some very serious unintended consequences.

Sincerely,

Barry Levy