March 2006

See also: WCA files second complaint against Craw in Calif. and DACBR describes Craw encounter

Complaint against Maggie Craw, DC,
Consultant for the
California Board of Chiropractic Examiners

As a resident of the state of California, and president of the World Chiropractic Alliance (WCA), I hereby register a complaint against Maggie Craw, DC, a consultant retained by the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners.

Craw engages in selective enforcement in her role as a consultant to the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners.

In a letter posted on the website of the American Chiropractic College of Radiology, Steven L. Weiner, DC summarized a conversation with Maggie Craw, DC. He stated that Craw informed him that "practicing as a 'radiologist' is not within our scope of practice AND that the ACBR (American Chiropractic Board of Radiology) is not officially recognized by the Chiropractic Board of California." Weiner's letter further states, "Maggie (Craw) went on to inform me that she has been aware of these facts for a period of time, but the Board is just too busy putting out bigger ires." (www.dacbr.com/2005_workshop/Reports/CA%20radiologist%20problems.pdf)

Craw has elected to "look the other way," for political reasons, when chiropractors represent themselves as specialists in fields traditionally held by medicine, such as radiology and orthopedics.

A chiropractor cannot claim to be anything other than a chiropractor by virtue of holding a chiropractic license. A chiropractor may not represent himself/herself as a medical specialist.

Under Opinion No. CV 76‑50 ‑‑ August 26, 1976, the attorney general's opinion addressed the query of the Honorable Eugene A. Chappie, Assemblyman for the 3rd District:

'Can a chiropractor, by virtue of his license, practice the art or claim to be an anatomist, neurologist, cardiologist, diagnostician ... orthopedist ... roentgenologist, dietician, or anything except a chiropractor?

Our conclusions are that by virtue of holding a chiropractic license:

1. A chiropractor cannot practice the art of anything but chiropractic...

2. A chiropractor cannot, solely by virtue of his chiropractic license, claim to be anything other than a chiropractor'.

CV 76‑50 further notes that pursuant to the Chiropractic Act, Initiative Measure, Statutes of 1923, page 1xxxviii, section 7 provides:

"One form of certificate shall be issued by the board of chiropractic examiners, which said Certificate shall be designated, 'License to practice chiropractic.'"

The principle that the Chiropractic Act is a limited exception to the requirements of licensure by the Board of Medical Examiners has been consistently upheld by the courts. See: Crees v. California State Board of Medical Examiners, 213 Cal. App. 2d 195 (1963); People v. Fowler, 32 Cal. App. 2d Supp. 737 (1938); People v. Augusto, 193 Cal. App. 2d 253 (1961).

Therefore, representing oneself as a "radiologist" or "orthopedist" on the basis of chiropractic licensure alone is unlawful.

Chiropractic specialties are not recognized under California law

As recently as October 11, 2005, the Office of Administrative law rejected regulation proposed by the Board of Chiropractic Examiners that would have established certification for a specialty, manipulation under anesthesia (MUA).

In rejecting this proposal, OAL stated,

"The proposed regulation has the effect of creating two types of chiropractors, those who may lawfully perform MUA and those who may not. This provision of the regulation is inconsistent with section 7 of the Act, which provides that possession of a license to practice chiropractic 'shall authorize the licensee to practice chiropractic in the State of California as taught in chiropractic schools or colleges.' The Act clearly authorizes only one form of license to practice and that all licensees are authorized to practice chiropractic on an equal basis. This regulation is inconsistent with this provision of the Act since it defines a component of chiropractic practice that some licensees may perform but others may not. In so doing it is inconsistent with section 7 of the Act and, thus, fails to satisfy the consistency standard of the APA." (OAL File No. 05‑0826‑03 S)

Only one license may be issued by the Board of Chiropractic Examiners. No specialties are authorized.

Craw is ignoring violations by chiropractors who are billing for services as "radiologists."

The letter by Steven L. Weiner posted on the website (above) admits that he "read some imaging for the plaintiff's primary care chiropractor" in a Worker's Compensation case. He noted that a defense attorney advised him that his "services as a 'radiologist' do NOT appear to be within the scope of practice..."

Craw, however, despite being "aware of these facts" has been "too busy putting out bigger fires."

Craw unlawfully identifies herself as a radiologist.

Craw's bias is evident in Weiner's statement that, "(W)e as chiropractic radiologists, in essence raise the standard of care in our profession with our services."

Furthermore, Craw appends the initials "DACBR" to her name in official Board correspondence, identifying herself as a chiropractic "radiologist."

Claims of superiority by a chiropractor are improper.

See: 651 (b) (6) Makes a claim either of professional superiority or of performing services in a superior manner, unless that claim is relevant to the service being performed and can be substantiated with objective scientific evidence.

No scientific evidence has been presented in support of the claim of superiority that, "(W)e as chiropractic radiologists, in essence raise the standard of care in our profession with our services."

Craw's selective enforcement discriminates against a "school of chiropractic" in violation of Section 16 of the Chiropractic Act.

Section 16 states, in part: "Nothing in this act shall be construed...so as to discriminate against any particular school of chiropractic..."

Craw's selective enforcement actions discriminate against "schools of chiropractic" by ignoring the violations of those who wish to represent themselves as medical specialists, and pursuing enforcement actions against practitioners of traditional chiropractic.

I therefore request that this complaint be fully investigated, and that Maggie Craw, DC be removed from her position as a Consultant to the California Board of Chiropractic Examiners.

Sincerely,

Terry A. Rondberg, DC

President, World Chiropractic Alliance