It should be obvious reading the sage advice of Dr. JD above that the cards are stacked against any victim of sham peer review. Often economic interests of competitors making charges against the victim are the very first concern. Your first thought is to race ahead, run screaming, into the office of the hospital CEO, calling your opponents up and swearing vociferously at them. Don’t do it.

You cannot do this yourself. You need expert help. Fortunately, such help is available.. Dr JD above-mentioned you should consult lawyers who are experts in peer review. Actually, there are very few who have the experience you need.

Ironically, and surprisingly, there is an ex-DPM who, although he is not an attorney, had exactly that experience. I have no working relationship with him, but have known him for many years. Most of his “clients’ are medical doctors in various stages of having their careers and lives shredded. he first started out “defending” a fellow DPM, but in fact almost all of the people he now works with are medical doctors.

You can learn about him here: Peer Review Justice .. His name is Richard Willner.

Thankfully, i have never had a personal experience with sham peer review. Although he is not himself an attorney, he has an entire phalanx of expert attorneys at his beck and call. His knowledge of the laws regarding peer review are unmatched, with the obvious exception of the attorneys he works with. At the very least, you should give him a call. there is a very real possibility that Dr JD above also works with Dr Willner and obtains clients from him.

Dr Willner has an excellent reputation in a very arcane and unexpected domain for an ex-podiatrist. You will never find a more vigorous, able and experienced consigliere in your new struggle.

He also has contacts and skills in helping you put your life together, with the very real possibility of getting another job, should you be forced to leave your present situation. Not surprisingly, that happens all too frequently after you face a sham peer review experience. Ostensibly this was designed to protect patients. Ultimately, it is war.

Michael M. Rosenblatt, DPM Response to a blog, 1/17/15