Connect with us

Published

on

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. Ariella Morrow, an internal medicine doctor, gradually slid from healthy self-esteem and professional success into the depths of depression.

This story also ran on LAist. It can be republished for free.

Beginning in 2015, she suffered a string of personal troubles, including a shattering family trauma, marital strife, and a major professional setback. At first, sheer grit and determination kept her going, but eventually she was unable to keep her troubles at bay and took refuge in heavy drinking. By late 2020, Morrow could barely get out of bed and didnt shower or brush her teeth for weeks on end. She was up to two bottles of wine a day, alternating it with Scotch whisky.

Sitting in her well-appointed home on a recent autumn afternoon, adorned in a bright lavender dress, matching lipstick, and a large pearl necklace, Morrow traced the arc of her surrender to alcohol: Im not going to drink before 5 p.m. Im not going to drink before 2. Im not going to drink while the kids are home. And then, it was 10 oclock, 9 oclock, wake up and drink. Ariella Morrow, a Los Angeles-area internist, fell into a deep depression and started drinking heavily after a succession of family traumas and a major professional setback. She finally sought help for alcohol dependence and depression at a clinic in Texas.(Bernard J. Wolfson/KFF Health News)

As addiction and overdose deaths command headlines across the nation, the Medical Board of California, which licenses MDs, is developing a new program to treat and monitor doctors with alcohol and drug problems. But a fault line has appeared over whether those who join the new program without being ordered to by the board should be subject to public disclosure.

Patient advocates note that the medical boards primary mission is to protect healthcare consumers and prevent harm, which they say trumps physician privacy.

The names of those required by the board to undergo treatment and monitoring under a disciplinary order are already made public. But addiction medicine professionals say that if the state wants troubled doctors to come forward without a board order, confidentiality is crucial.

Public disclosure would be a powerful disincentive for anybody to get help and would impede early intervention, which is key to avoiding impairment on the job that could harm patients, said Scott Hambleton, president of the Federation of State Physician Health Programs, whose core members help arrange care and monitoring of doctors for substance use disorders and mental health conditions as an alternative to discipline.

But consumer advocates argue that patients have a right to know if their doctor has an addiction. Doctors are supposed to talk to their patients about all the risks and benefits of any treatment or procedure, yet the risk of an addicted doctor is expected to remain a secret? Marian Hollingsworth, a volunteer advocate with the Patient Safety Action Network, told the medical board at a Nov. 14 hearing on the new program.

Doctors are as vulnerable to addiction as anyone else. People who work to help rehabilitate physicians say the rate of substance use disorders among them is at least as high as the rate for the general public, which the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration put at 17.3% in a Nov. 13 report.

Alcohol is a very common drug of choice among doctors, but their ready access to pain meds is also a particular risk.

If you have an opioid use disorder and are working in an operating room with medications like fentanyl staring you down, its a challenge and can be a trigger, said Chwen-Yuen Angie Chen, an addiction medicine doctor who chairs the Well-Being of Physicians and Physicians-in-Training Committee at Stanford Health Care. Its like someone with an alcohol use disorder working at a bar. Email Sign-Up

Subscribe to KFF Health News' free Morning Briefing. Your Email Address Sign Up

From Pioneer to Lagger

California was once at the forefront of physician treatment and monitoring. In 1981, the medical board launched a program for the evaluation, treatment, and monitoring of physicians with mental illness or substance use problems. Participants were often required to take random drug tests, attend multiple group meetings a week, submit to work-site surveillance by colleagues, and stay in the program for at least five years. Doctors who voluntarily entered the program generally enjoyed confidentiality, but those ordered into it by the board as part of a disciplinary action were on the public record.

The program was terminated in 2008 after several audits found serious flaws. One such audit, conducted by Julianne DAngelo Fellmeth, a consumer interest lawyer who was chosen as an outside monitor for the board, found that doctors in the program were often able to evade the random drug tests, attendance at mandatory group therapy sessions was not accurately tracked, and participants were not properly monitored at work sites.

Today, MDs who want help with addiction can seek private treatment on their own or in many cases are referred by hospitals and other health care employers to third parties that organize treatment and surveillance. The medical board can order a doctor on probation to get treatment.

In contrast, the California licensing boards of eight other health-related professions, including osteopathic physicians, registered nurses, dentists, and pharmacists, have treatment and monitoring programs administered under one master contract by a publicly traded company called Maximus Inc. California paid Maximus about $1.6 million last fiscal year to administer those programs.

When and if the final medical board regulations are adopted, the next step would be for the board to open bidding to find a program administrator.

Fall From Grace

Morrows troubles started long after the original California program had been shut down.

The daughter of a prominent cosmetic surgeon, Morrow grew up in Palm Springs in circumstances she describes as beyond privileged. Her father, David Morrow, later became her most trusted mentor.

But her charmed life began to fall apart in 2015, when her father and mother, Linda Morrow, were indicted on federal insurance fraud charges in a well-publicized case. In 2017, the couple fled to Israel in an attempt to escape criminal prosecution, but later they were both arrested and returned to the United States to face prison sentences.

The legal woes of Morrows parents, later compounded by marital problems related to the failure of her husbands business, took a heavy toll on Morrow. She was in her early 30s when the trouble with her parents started, and she was working 16-hour days to build a private medical practice, with two small children at home. By the end of 2019, she was severely depressed and turning increasingly to alcohol. Then, the loss of her admitting privileges at a large Los Angeles hospital due to inadequate medical record-keeping shattered what remained of her self-confidence.

Morrow, reflecting on her experience, said the very strengths that propel doctors through medical school and keep them going in their careers can foster a sense of denial. We are so strong that our strength is our greatest threat. Our power is our powerlessness, she said. Morrow ignored all the flashing yellow lights and even the red light beyond which serious trouble lay: I blew through all of it, and I fell off the cliff.

By late 2020, no longer working, bedridden by depression, and drinking to excess, she realized she could no longer will her way through: I finally said to my husband, I need help. He said, I know you do.

Ultimately, she packed herself off to a private residential treatment center in Texas. Now sober for 21 months, Morrow said the privacy of the addiction treatment she chose was invaluable because it shielded her from professional scrutiny.

I didnt have to feel naked and judged, she said.

Morrow said her privacy concerns would make her reluctant to join a state program like the one being considere by the medical board.

Physician Privacy vs. Patient Protection

The proposed regulations would spare doctors in the program who were not under board discipline from public disclosure as long as they stayed sober and complied with all the requirements, generally including random drug tests, attendance at group sessions, and work-site monitoring. If the program put a restriction on a doctors medical license, it would be posted on the medical boards website, but without mentioning the doctors participation in the program.

Yet even that might compromise a doctors career since having a restricted license for unspecified reasons could have many enduring personal and professional implications, none positive, said Tracy Zemansky, a clinical psychologist and president of the Southern California division of Pacific Assistance Group, which provides support and monitoring for physicians.

Zemansky and others say doctors, just like anyone else, are entitled to medical privacy under federal law, as long as they havent caused harm.

Many who work in addiction medicine also criticized the proposed new program for not including mental health problems, which often go hand in hand with addiction and are covered by physician health programs in other states.

To forgo mental health treatment, I think, is a grave mistake, Morrow said. For her, depression and alcoholism were inseparable, and the residential program she attended treated her for both.

Another point of contention is money. Under the current proposal, doctors would bear all the costs of the program.

The initial clinical evaluation, plus the regular random drug tests, group sessions, and monitoring at their work sites could cost participants over $27,000 a year on average, according to estimates posted by the medical board. And if they were required to go for 30-day inpatient treatment, that would add an additional $40,000 plus nearly $36,000 in lost wages.

People who work in the field of addiction medicine believe that is an unfair burden. They note that most programs for physicians in other states have outside funding to reduce the cost to participants.

The cost should not be fully borne by the doctors, because there are many other people that are benefiting from this, including the board, malpractice insurers, hospitals, the medical association, said Greg Skipper, a semi-retired addiction medicine doctor who ran Alabamas state physician health program for 12 years. In Alabama, he said, those institutions contribute to the program, significantly cutting the amount doctors have to pay.

The treatment program that Morrow attended in spring of 2021, at The Menninger Clinic in Houston, cost $80,000 for a six-week stay, which was covered by a concerned family member. It saved my life, she said.

Though Morrow had difficulty maintaining her sobriety in the first year after treatment, she has now been sober since April 2, 2022. These days, Morrow regularly attends therapy and Alcoholics Anonymous and has pivoted to become an addiction medicine doctor.

I am a better doctor today because of my experience no question, Morrow said. I am proud to be a doctor whos an alcoholic in recovery.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

Bernard J. Wolfson: bwolfson@kff.org, @bjwolfson Related Topics California Health Industry Mental Health States Doctors Hospitals Substance Misuse Contact Us Submit a Story Tip

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Actress ‘shell-shocked’ when asked to ‘bend further’ while filming with Noel Clarke, court hears

Published

on

By

Actress 'shell-shocked' when asked to 'bend further' while filming with Noel Clarke, court hears

An actress who worked in a film directed by Noel Clarke said she felt “shell-shocked” when he asked her to “bend over further” during a scene where she was naked from the waist down, the High Court has heard.

The woman, known only as Mila, gave evidence on Thursday in Clarke’s legal case against Guardian News and Media (GNM).

Mila told the court that although she felt uncomfortable about filming the nude scene, she needed the work.

In her witness statement, she said: “Noel was telling me to bend over, repeating things like ‘bend over further, come on’, and ‘do it properly’.

“I was clearly very uncomfortable and resisting doing this, I was doing the strip tease as requested and this extra request did not feel necessary.

“He repeated these comments until I bent over further and further until I was bent completely over with my bum in the air.”

Read more from Sky News:
How has Trump – the ‘dealmaker’ – done on foreign policy?
Jack Draper: The 6ft 4in British left-hander with tennis in his blood

Mila added that she felt “hugely embarrassed, blindsided and shell shocked” by the filming.

Mila also said that while Clarke’s tone “might have sounded jovial to some, it was very persistent”.

Philip Williams, for Clarke, asked her: “Noel’s tone was encouraging and jovial, that is why you put it in, because others knew it was jovial.”

Mila replied: “He was masking his persistent direction.

“If he had been aggressive, or really, really shouting at me, that would have been hard to get away with.”

Clarke, 49, is suing the publisher of the Guardian newspaper over seven articles and a podcast, including an article in April 2021 that said 20 women who knew him professionally had come forward with allegations of misconduct.

He denies the allegations, while GNM is defending its reporting as being both true and in the public interest.

In Mila’s witness statement, she said she later worked on another project with Clarke, but this had no sex scenes.

Some time after this she received a message from Clarke “out of the blue”, asking if they could speak, she said.

Mila said that during the call he asked her if they “were cool” in relation to the first film they worked on.

The actress said in her statement: “I told him that I was not ok with it and that I had felt very uncomfortable at various points and that I would not let something like that happen to me again.

“Noel said he was sorry if he had made me feel uncomfortable.

“He was talking about how becoming a father had made him reflect and that he wanted to raise his sons to be upstanding young men. He said he was ringing round people to apologise.”

She added that he seemed “panicked” on the call, and it seemed to her that “his purpose was either fishing to see whether I was unhappy about his treatment of me on the film, or he was trying to cover his tracks in some way”.

Clarke’s denial

Clarke denies the allegations Mila has made, and in his witness statement, said: “The reiteration of the scene is highly distorted and exaggerated.

“This scene was not filmed to procure any kind of personal or sexual gratification, nor was that ever the intention.”

He added: “I did not comment in the way pleaded, and did not ask Mila to bend over in any way which made her uncomfortable, or in a way which was not true to the script.”

In relation to the phone call, Clarke said he got in contact with Mila after being made aware of comments she had made about her experience filming the nude scene.

He added: “I apologised for any hardship she may have felt or if, in retrospect, Mila felt uncomfortable.

“I confirmed that no untoward behaviour had been engaged in, and reassured her that protocol had been followed by the crew at all times.

“Mila accepted my apology, admitting that in retrospect, she had changed her mind about her involvement in the scene, and felt uncomfortable taking part in an explicit scene.”

The hearing before Mrs Justice Steyn is due to conclude in April, with a decision expected in writing at a later date.

Continue Reading

Business

Bank of England holds interest rate at 4.5% amid trade war uncertainty

Published

on

By

Bank of England holds interest rate at 4.5% amid trade war uncertainty

The Bank of England has kept interest rates on hold as it warned of growing economic uncertainty linked to Donald Trump’s trade war. 

The central bank’s monetary policy committee, which meets every six weeks to set borrowing costs, voted 8-1 to keep the bank rate unchanged at 4.5%.

Although the decision was widely expected, the vote was more unified than many assumed.

Just one member of the committee, Swati Dhingra, voted to cut rates by 25 basis points. In what may come as a surprise to some, Catherine Mann, who voted for an outsized 50 basis points cut last month, opted to hold.

The Bank kept its guidance unchanged, pointing to “a gradual and careful approach” to rate cuts, but warned it was prepared to keep borrowing rates higher for longer if wage and price growth continues to persist.

Concerns about constrained supply in the economy – which limits the economy’s ability to grow without sparking inflation – have been playing on policymakers’ minds.

The Bank echoed these concerns again today, alongside warnings about “second-round effects” from higher wages and prices, which could cause inflation to spiral. “This would warrant a relatively tighter monetary path,” it said.

More on Bank Of England

Trade war concerns

Central bankers said they were also contending with an increasingly uncertain global outlook.

In minutes of the meeting published alongside the announcement, the Bank said: “Since the MPC’s previous meeting, global trade policy uncertainty has intensified, and the United States has made a range of tariff announcements, to which some governments have responded.

“Other geopolitical uncertainties have also increased and indicators of financial market volatility have risen globally.”

The Bank was relatively sanguine about the impact of Trump’s tariff policy on the economic growth in the UK but said it could not be certain about the consequences for inflation.

Last night the US Federal Reserve kept its key borrowing rate on hold while downgrading growth forecasts and upgrading its inflation projections.

Central bankers in the UK are also contending with heightened policy uncertainty – both at home and abroad – which means they have been cautious in their approach.

Bank governor Andrew Bailey said: “We have to be quite careful at this point in how we calibrate our response because we’re still seeing a very gradual fall in inflation. We need to accumulate the evidence.”

The Bank started cutting rates in August but, since then, it has reduced the bank rate just three times as policymakers evaluate a mixed economic picture.

Along with fears about supply constraints in the economy, inflation has climbed back above the Bank of England’s 2% target and wage growth continues to outstrip inflation.

Average weekly earnings, including bonuses, did cool from 6.1 % to 5.8% in the three months to January but the figure is still considerably higher than the inflation rate of 3%.

Central bankers keep a close eye on wage growth as they fear wage pressures fuel price pressures in the economy.

Inflationary pressures still exist in the economy but the Bank is balancing that against signs of an economic slowdown.

The economy contracted by 0.1 % at the beginning of the year and the labour market is cooling. Recruiters are warning of a sharper slowdown when the chancellor’s national insurance contribution increases kick in next month.

The Bank of England reiterated this today, warning that business surveys “generally continue to suggest weakness in growth and particularly employment intentions”.

Where to for inflation?

There are also reasons to be sanguine on inflation.

While the headline rate jumped to 3% in January, the increase was driven by one-off factors and base effects, including VAT on private schools and a jump in airfares because of a shift in the timing of the Christmas holidays.

Food inflation also rose but food prices can be volatile.

The Bank is more interested in services inflation, which gives a better indication of domestically generated pressures. This came in at 5%, which was below the Bank’s forecast.

While the headline rate is expected to hit 3.7% by the summer, policymakers have indicated that this is likely to be a bump in the road – driven by a temporary jump in energy prices and rising water and council tax bills from April.

While these will eventually drop out of the inflation rate calculation, that will offer little relief to consumers who will still have to contend with a sustained rise in the price level.

Continue Reading

Politics

Canary files for PENGU ETF

Published

on

By

Canary files for PENGU ETF

Canary files for PENGU ETF

Asset manager Canary Capital has filed to list an exchange-traded fund (ETF) holding Pengu (PENGU), the governance token of the Pudgy Penguins non-fungible token (NFT) project, US regulatory filings show. 

The ETF is the latest in a slew of filings for new US investment products tied to spot cryptocurrencies, including altcoins and memecoins. 

According to the filing, the ETF is intended to hold spot PENGU as well as various Pudgy Penguins NFTs. It would be the first US ETF to hold NFTs if approved. 

Additionally, “[t]he Trust will also hold other digital assets, such as SOL and ETH, that are necessary or incidental to the purchase, sale and transfer of the Trust’s PENGU and Pudgy Penguins NFTs,” the filing said. 

Launched in December, PUDGY has a roughly $438-million market capitalization as of March 20, according to CoinGecko.

On March 18, Canary filed to list the first US ETF holding Sui (SUI), the native token of the Sui layer-1 blockchain network.

Canary files for PENGU ETF

Pudgy Penguins is among the most popular NFT brands. Source: Cointelegraph

Related: Canary Capital proposes first Sui ETF in US SEC filing

Policy reversal

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has acknowledged dozens of filings for new crypto investment products since US President Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20. 

They include filings for proposed ETFs for native L1 tokens such as Solana (SOL) and XRP (XRP), as well as for memecoins such as Dogecoin (DOGE) and Official Trump (TRUMP). 

Some industry analysts are skeptical that ETFs holding non-core cryptocurrencies will see a meaningful uptake among traditional investors. 

“Pengu ETF announced. Price barely goes up. New ETFs for crypto assets have become an irrelevant joke,” crypto researcher Alex Krüger said in a March 20 post on the X platform. “Most crypto ETFs will fail to attract AUM and cost issuers money.”

Since starting his second presidential term, Trump has reversed the US government’s stance on digital assets, promising to make America “the world’s crypto capital.” 

Under his predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, US regulatory agencies brought upward of 100 enforcement actions against crypto firms.

On March 20, asset manager Volatility Shares launched two Solana futures ETFs, the Volatility Shares Solana ETF (SOLZ) and the Volatility Shares 2X Solana ETF (SOLT). 

They use financial derivatives to track SOL’s performance with one- and two-time leverage, respectively. Spot SOL ETFs are still awaiting regulatory approval. 

Magazine: Crypto fans are obsessed with longevity and biohacking — Here’s why 

Continue Reading

Trending