Fact Checking Claims About Rand Paul’s Professional Background
Claims about malpractice lawsuits are true, but certification claims aren’t so simple.
A viral tweet claims that Sen. Rand Paul was sued twice for malpractice while he was a working eye doctor, and that his certification was obtained under dubious circumstances.
The post received further attention after being shared on Facebook.
Paul has been sued for malpractice on two occasions; Paul was found not liable by a jury in one case and settled for $50,000 in the other.* Both patients sued Paul for not delivering sufficient care.
As to Paul’s certification, the post is only half true: When Paul began his medical career in 1995, he was certified by the American Board of Ophthalmology, the largest ophthalmology certifier in the country. Paul says that in protest of the board requiring recertification every 10 years, he created a new certification board, the National Board of Ophthalmology, in 1997 and allowed his ABO certification to lapse in 2005. Not only did Paul found the NBO, he served as its head and family members served in its leadership roles. The NBO was dissolved in 2011, and at no point in its existence was it recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties—the speciality certification arm of the American Medical Association, the largest national association of medical professionals in the country.
Under Kentucky law, board certification is not required for a physician to practice, meaning Paul was still able to work as an ophthalmologist—board certification is a voluntary step that doctors can take to show expertise in a specialization.
Correction, February 1, 2022: An earlier version of this article stated that Paul was found innocent in one malpractice suit. Neither civil nor criminal trial juries find “innocence,” and civil juries determine whether or not a defendant is liable.
If you have a claim you would like to see us fact check, please send us an email at factcheck@thedispatch.com. If you would like to suggest a correction to this piece or any other Dispatch article, please email corrections@thedispatch.com.
It gets so tiring listening to Rand Paul’s constant bitching about anything that’s not in direct admiration of his views. Starting his own board is pure Paul. He’s nothing more that the cranky neighbor down the street shaking his fist at little kids for squealing with delight while they ride their bikes. Paul and Bernie deserve each other but the rest of us don’t deserve them.
Anybody who thinks two malpractice claims is questionable for a physician simply doesn't understand modern medicine.
"By the age of 65 years, 75% of physicians in low-risk specialties and 99% of those in high-risk specialties were projected to face a claim."
"The projected career risk of making an indemnity payment was also large. [...] by the age of 65 years, the risks [of making an indemnity payment] had increased to 19% [of physicians in low-risk specialities] and 71% [for high-risk specialities]."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3204310/
Ophthalmology is considered 'low-risk' in this study (which surprised me). However it is still very very predictable for Sen. Rand to have had a couple of malpractice claims by now.
My wife once refused to fullfill someone's prescription for opiates as a first year resident... the patient broke their TV in a fit of rage and threatened to sue the hospital for damages. The rumor was the hospital gave him a Walmart gift card to go towards a new TV... but I'd hate to think someone acted like this was a smudge on my wife's first year of work.