1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | change in medication was implemented. LPA was not able to determine if the need or request for the change was initiated by the psychiatrist, licensee, or C1; however, evidence obtained during the investigation revealed that, after discussion with C1’s psychiatrist, C1, who is very high functioning, requested an increase in dosage of anxiety medication. LPA was able to determine that there were exchanges between the licensee and psychiatrist and/or personnel of the psychiatrist’s office that were not amicable. Despite the inability of the licensee and C1’s psychiatrist to maintain an agreeable relationship, the investigation did not yield evidence to conclude that the licensee interfered with communications between C1 and C1’s psychiatrist.
Based upon a lack of sufficient evidence to corroborate the allegation, the allegation is unsubstantiated. This finding means that although the allegation may have happened or may be valid, there is not a preponderance of evidence to prove that the alleged violation occurred.
An exit interview was conducted with Lauren Russell, and a copy of this report and Licensee/Appeal Rights (LIC 9058) were provided to the staff at the conclusion of the visit.
|