CALIFORNIA CHIROPRACTIC BOARD NEEDS A MAJOR ADJUSTMENT

When I asked the (then) Executive Director of the board, Kim Smith, who I could complain to regarding their handling of my complaint, I was surprised and dismayed to find that the Chiropractic Board answers to no one but the Governor! I obtained the help of a patient advocate, Cindy Boling of AdvocateWeb.org. She gave me immeasurable direction, support and guidance and I then pursued looking for someone this Board was accountable to, although the odds seemed very stacked against me.

I’ve accepted long ago that there can be no different resolution of my original complaint, but I am concerned for the hundreds of other patients who may have experienced or may be experiencing the same lack of protection and unfair treatment that I received from this Board. Also important to note is that even members of the Governor’s staff are unaware that the Chiropractic board is not under any overseeing consumer agency. It is so counterintuitive that the board would not be under some responsible department that I’ve been referred from agency to agency.

I initially sent my written concerns to the Governor’s Constituent Affairs and also contacted my own Assemblyman, John Benoit. Assemblyman Benoit and his staff were dismissive of my concerns and had no interest in pursuing any change in the operations of the Chiropractic Board. The staff at Constituent Affairs sent my letter to the California Department of Consumer Affairs as they assumed that this Department was over the Chiropractic Board. Their mistake, or divine providence, of sending my letter to Consumer Affairs turned out to be the best thing that could have happened for me. My letter was given to James Bowles who was then the Governor’s Office Liaison of Consumer Affairs. He had absolutely no reason to help me but went out of his way to share his knowledge, give me guidance and has been a tremendous support ever since.

After talking to me, Mr. Bowles returned my materials back to Constituent Affairs. I personally left material at the State Capitol that summer and was told it would be given to the Governor’s legislative staff. The Governor’s staff sent it to State and Consumer Services Agency, as they believed that this agency was over the Chiropractic Board and that agency sent it back to the legislative staff. I finally spoke to Jennifer Fitzgerald, on the legislative staff, and was told that since no other agency is over this Board that the only means of addressing concerns or complaints of the California Chiropractic Board is through finding a representative to support legislative action. Why should any citizen have to go to such lengths to express concern about a Government Board?

I turned again to James Bowles and he referred me to Senator Jackie Speier as someone who might be helpful to me. Although I wasn’t her constituent, she and her legislative aide, Brian Perkins, were very supportive and helpful. The Senator even considered initiating potential legislation of her own to improve Chiropractic laws. Senator Speier sent me a copy of a letter she sent to the Governor’s office that states “I am trying to determine if it is worth the energy to clean up the statutes of California. I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the first clean up has to come with an entirely different attitude by the Board of Chiropractic Examiners.”

There have been several Joint legislative Sunset reviews of the Chiropractic Board over the past several years. Each review confirms this Boards’ unique structure that places it as one of the only Boards’ governing professionals not under the umbrella of the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA). The 2000 Sunset Review Report states on pages 14 and 15. “This Board operates freely without any oversight of a state department or agency……..” “Rather than having to pursue litigation to implement changes to the Act, both the Department (DCA) and the Legislature should be vested with oversight of the Board. The current structure has produced a perception of a lack of accountability on the part of the Board.”

In 1993, the Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended that all state boards, including the Chiropractic Board, be consolidated under the Department of Consumer Affairs. The Center for Public Interest Law has also recommended that this board be treated the same as other licensing boards under the DCA and that their initiative provisions be codified and subject to change or revision by the Legislature without having to seek a vote of the electorate (2000 Sunset Review).

In the 2002 Sunset Review, the Chiropractic Board responds to the Committee concern of a lack of oversight. The Board lists several entities as having authority over them: the Governor’s office, Center for Public Interest Law, and the Office of the Attorney General among others. Notably lacking is an agency that a constituent can appeal to. They go further by asserting “The Deputy Attorney General assigned to the Board serves the same function as the DCA staff attorneys assigned to specific boards under the DCA umbrella” (2002 Sunset Review p. 42). Apparently they do not appreciate this oversight if the Deputy Attorney General happens to question the legality of their actions.

The Sacramento Bee states that at a March 1, 2007 meeting, the Chiropractic Board ejected its’ state appointed deputy attorney, Jana Tuton, from the meeting and attempted to replace her with an attorney they had selected. Jana Tuton is also quoted saying that “the panel was lawless.” As far as Governor Schwarzenegger’s oversight, his quote in the March 8th edition of “Sacramento Bee” says it all. “What is important to us is does the Chiropractic Board represent the Chiropractors.” Funny thing is that on this Board’s website their mission is “protecting Californian’s from fraudulent or incompetent practice of Chiropractic.”

After being treated by the unethical chiropractor I did switch to someone who was very professional and was also helpful in helping me understand the Chiropractic profession. I know from him that most chiropractors don’t want to be under a general State Medical Board, but when he spoke of the Chiropractic Board’s handling of my complaint, he said that if they can’t do a better job than this that perhaps it is time for this to happen. The Chiropractic Board bristles at the idea of being placed under the Department of Consumer Affairs as they believe that bias and prejudice against their profession still exist. “The industry and the Board strongly believe that the bias and prejudice against the profession still lingers within certain entities and has the potential for influencing DCA to the detriment of the Board, the consumer, and the profession.” (2002 Sunset Review page 42)

The latest news articles detailing the behavior of the staff and Board members lack of respect for each other or for the law scream out their need for serious oversight and legal revision. I hope at this point that the chiropractic profession realizes that their board is giving them a black eye. I’m also hopeful that they will now put the needs of the California consumer before any fears of bias. I see no reason why Chiropractors should not be bound by the same laws and safeguards that are in place for other healthcare professionals.

I believe this quote from the 2000 Sunset Review Committee Report (page 32) sums it up best. “Although there have been concerns raised by the profession about amending the Initiative Act, there is no clear argument why this board should not be treated similar to other consumer health-related boards, and subject to the same consumer protection requirements. This Board should not be allowed to continue as an unaccountable “fourth branch” of government just because it was created by an Initiative Act.”

Deborah Snow was born and raised in California. Deborah received her BA degree from California Baptist University in Riverside, CA. majoring in both English and Behavioral Science. She is currently employed at University of California, Riverside as a Library Assistant. Deborah is married and has one daughter. She also volunteers in her spare time at Riverside City and County Animal Shelter.