A psychiatrist who becomes a patient for alcoholism or other addictions

isn't necessarily prevented from ethically treating clients as long as the doctor actively follows a therapy plan.

That the view expressed by several leading psychiatrists in the state.

Despite their role as healers, doctors are subject to the same diseases, mental illness and struggles other people face - but also could end up losing licenses for careers they spent years in school to earn.

Such is the case for Santa Maria and Pismo Beach psychiatrist Dr. Rand Ritchie. The Attorney General's Office is seeking discipline against Ritchie, including revoking or suspending his medical license, because of a misdemeanor conviction for driving under the influence of a drug and alcohol in

August 2006 in Buellton. It wasn't his first offense.

Dr. David Pating, a psychiatrist with Kaiser Permanente in San Francisco and the immediate past president of the California Society of Addiction Medicine, said the public would be best served if doctors with alcoholism receive treatment.

Advertisement

“If they're actively having problems, and there are safety concerns, then we should consider having them not practicing,” he said.

“I would be cautious about any physician that has ... current alcohol problems and is currently drinking,” Pating said, but added that if a doctor is receiving treatment and is staying clean, he or she can return to work with monitoring.

Pating said he doesn't believe doctors are obligated to confess their medical problems to their patients, but said there is an ethical obligation to identify impaired physicians.

Since the California Medical Board's diversion program ended in late June, physicians with impairments have fewer options.

Now, California lacks a standardized monitoring program for physicians, Pating said.

Dr. Bruce Spring, a psychiatrist in Los Angeles and the immediate past president of the Southern California Psychiatric Society, agreed that the end of the Medical Board's diversion program “was a significant and important loss for doctors in California and patients.”

Spring said that any physician who is a danger to patients for whatever reason should not be in practice and seeing patients.

Many doctors with alcohol problems are not endangering patients, he said, such as doctors who have not had a drink in 30 or 40 years.

“Sometimes a doctor saying, ‘I'm an alcoholic' is a good thing,” Spring said.

The accusation against Ritchie from the Attorney General's Office was filed at the request of Barbara Johnston, the executive director of the California Medical Board, which licenses and regulates medical doctors in the state.

Previously, Ritchie was convicted of three separate driving under the influence incidents from 1985 to 1991.

The Attorney General's Office's case has been put on hold pending the outcome of an appeal filed in the most recent DUI criminal case.

The doctor has said he is an alcoholic, and has been attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings for 22 years.

He said he only relapsed twice in 20 years - first when his wife died and later when he had a failed back surgery. One relapse lasted four months and the other lasted two months, Ritchie said.

Dr. Marc Graff, a psychiatrist with Kaiser Permanente in the Los Angeles area and the president of the California Psychiatric Association, said he worked with Ritchie 25 years ago.

Ritchie was “a decent human being who worked hard and was a good psychiatrist,” Graff said.

For Ritchie to lose his license and have “everything grind down to nothing” would be a waste of a person, he said.

Graff said he has seen plenty of people who have a substance abuse problem and can still do good work.

He said he does not have a problem with Ritchie treating patients, as long as he abstains from alcohol, attends recovery meetings and is getting appropriate support for his alcoholism.

“But if he's using and not able to control himself, that's a problem,” Graff added.

Samantha Yale can be reached at 739-2159 or syale@santamariatimes.com.

October 5, 2008