We Get Letters & E-Mail

A Few Words from Dr. Jim

Dear Editor:

First, congratulations to Dynamic Chiropractic for a well done report on my situation at Parker College ("Parker College Board 'Removes' Dr. Jim Parker From Campus," Dynamic Chiropractic, May 5, 1997). The facts, and their sequencing, were logical and appropriate.

From the hundreds of contacts I have received, from questions asked, and my re-reading the whole report in total, from several sources (including the board), I find some additional clarification and information are needed.

First, to help Parker College, etc., the courts ruled that I violated their orders, beginning with cashing in a 1.9 million dollar pension plan, of which the college got about one million, so the judge "threw the book at me." The result was an award against me that was some two million dollars more than our entire estate, including PCRF and SHARE.

Therefore, to continue operating PSPS seminars, the college had to buy PCRF and SHARE out of bankruptcy. Thus, these entities became under the control of the Board of Trustees. This was not explained in the first report.

As a consequence of this, and because I would not sign a new contract (my former one extended to September 12, 2000), that part of the board not only deposed me as president, but in order to punish me for not signing their contract, they removed me from the campus and my teaching position at PSPS, except as provided by law. Can you imagine -- the founder and developer?

The most frequently asked question in communications that come to me is, "Why would these old friends do this to you?" My answer always has been first to remind everyone that there was a clause in my present contract that I could be removed "without cause" and receive a stipend until the end of that contract, which is now being provided.

However, they also passed a resolution that I would receive the title to the college car I now drive, and the deed to the home I originally owned in SHARE. However, for some reason, neither of these have yet been transferred, though I have reminded the business office at the college several times to transfer both at the same time.

Outside of the one instance of trying to close the college before it opened in 1982, the board and I had very few disagreements. As one respondent noted, "For the board to tell you how to run the college, other than set policy, etc., would be like a CA telling the doctor how to treat a patient." And no board member rarely (if ever) did this, as I recall. Maybe that's one reason why we have been so successful, resulting in the third largest chiropractic college in the country, and a debt-free institution in its 13th year with 1271 students currently enrolled.

An example of my relationship with board members occurred on April 15, 1996, when Dr. Leander Eckard wrote me, " ... I want you to remain in your present position as President as long as you wish ... you should have an employment contract with the college for a quarter of a million a year salary for the rest of your life." Yet, Dr. Eckard voted to depose me "without cause" about five months later. I understand they are now figuring up reasons which are not relevant.

After his first trimester at Parker during Christmas of 1989, Dr. Tim Murphy wrote me the following:" ... Dear Doc, Merry Xmas! 1989 was a blur! Mary Margaret and I have so much to be thankful for! Patrick and Sean (two sons), the new campus, tri one, and then there's you! I don't have to try for any "brownie points" but rather just stop and take a few minutes out -- during what has been one incredible year!

"We accomplished a great deal together ... but most of all I am so thankful and appreciative of what you've done for Mary and me, and the fact that she has been able to stay home with the kids ... you've been much more than just a boss -- a "leader," a wise-man," a "mentor," but most of all a "FRIEND!" I have a great deal of respect for what you have done, where you've been, your endless accomplishments, and am thankful that I am fortunate enough to be the one that got to be your assistant ... I want you to always know that I have the utmost respect for you and my loyalty goes along with that ... thanks for your patience, love and support during the days I was doing nothing but studying ... Love, Tim."

Within 20 hours after Tim was inducted as a board member, he made a motion to depose me as president and let the presidency be vacant. This hurts the most! I might also mention that I took a weekend and attended Dr. Murphy's office opening in Biloxi, MS, the only one in my history, too. I provided him work for the two years prior to college entrance while attending North Lake.

The former wife of the Chairman of the Board, Dr. Rob Czopoth, wrote me in May, 1996 that when they were first married and attended PSPS, Dr. Czopoth had 35 patients per week. When she began the separation process, they had 400 patient visits per week.

I could go on and on, but about the only reason I met these board members was because they attended PSPS with well-known results and thus I felt their gratitude would make them loyal to the principles and practices I embraced, including trust as board members.

In Chicago in early May, I was not allowed to present my usual Thursday session, even though it had been so advertised, so about 100 people walked out and rented a meeting room where I taught them for nine hours during the weekend. Even though I will be at the Las Vegas seminar in July, I have not been invited by Dr. Karl or the board to teach my usual part.

When I visit the campus now, a security guard follows me around to give reports (no doubt to people I hired). I now think the "love of power" is destroying the "power of love" at Parker College.

Once again, my address is: Box 177100, Tyler, TX 75060 for those who wish to contact me, or you can send a fax at (972) 445-1823.

James W. Parker, DC
Irving, Texas

Dear Editor:

Several of your subscribers advised us that we were mentioned in your article, "Parker College Board 'Removes' Dr. Jim Parker from Campus: Dr. Parker Sues Board Member and College's Legal Counsel," published on page 1 of your May 5, 1997 issue. Two additional facts need to be added to more objectively reflect the true picture.

1. Before making the statements that are contained in your article, Dr. Parker had dismissed his lawsuit against Ray E. Green & Associates, P.C. by filing a notice of nonsuit that stated "[he] no longer desires to prosecute this suit."

2. Your article quotes extensively from Dr. Parker's lawyer, Steven T. Long, including statements that questioned the ethics of our firm. On March 17, 1997, the same day that Mr. Long made his statement to your newspaper, a judgement was signed to suspend his law license for three years, to be followed by three years probation for ethical violations committed by him.

(Editor's note: The Texas Bar's verbatim disciplinary action against Attorney Long is detailed below.)

"Suspension/Probation

"According to a March 17, 1997 judgement, the Bar placed Steven T. Long of San Antonio, Bar no. 12535780, on suspension for three years beginning June 16, 1997, to be followed by three years probation. The judgement orders Long to pay $5,000 in attorney's fees to the bar and restitution of $22,113.84 to Ana Cancel Lugo.

"The Bar's amended disciplinary petition alleges that Lugo obtained Long to obtain life insurance proceeds in connection with the accidental drowning death of her husband. Lugo signed a contingency fee contract that gave Long and another attorney, Leigh Mammarella, an interest in any settlement proceeds, the petition claims. The petition contends that Long received a settlement check made out to Lugo and Mammarella and that he endorsed the check and deposited it in his account, commingling the funds with his personal funds. Long never received Lugo's consent to settle the manner, he never informed her that a settlement had been received, and he failed to disburse any settlement proceeds to her, the petition adds.

"According to the petition, Lugo was later told by the insurance company that the matter had been settled, but when she questioned Long, he misrepresented the status of the matter by telling Lugo that the case hadn't settled. When Lugo demanded money, the petition adds, Long failed to account for the settlement funds that he had received on her behalf.

"Long did not return a call for comment."

(224th District Court, No. 96-C1-14156)

Dear Editor:

I read with concern your article describing that Dr. Jim Parker was deposed as president of Parker College of Chiropractic. I attended the PSPS seminar in Chicago the first week of may. It was disheartening in many respects.

Dr. Michael Shanks began the seminar on Thursday evening by introducing Dr. Karl Parker, instead of Dr. Jim as was advertised for months before (and who my entire office was attending to hear him speak). He began by saying in his introduction, words to the effect that Dr. Jim had stepped down from teaching, that he was willingly handing over this responsibility to Dr. Karl, and that Dr. Karl would teach the material that night with Dr. Jim's blessing. This was absolutely not true. I listened to this with disbelief and bewilderment.

I talked with Dr. Jim personally thirty minutes before this event, and he told me he was there for the purpose of teaching his regular "teleology" lecture, as advertised, and that he was ready, willing and able to do so. As it turned out, he was not permitted to do so.

We were all disappointed that Dr. Parker could not present his material to the audience at large. Luckily, he was able to teach to an informal gathering of about 100 that assembled spontaneously in another part of the hotel to hear Dr. Parker speak.

I don't know what the reasons are that the board of Parker College has removed Dr. Parker from his official duties as president, and now from teaching at PSPS seminars. I hope to learn more about it in DC. Thank you for covering this important development.

James J. Yeates, DC
Virginia Beach, Virginia

Dear Editor:

I always look forward to reading my copy of Dynamic Chiropractic for its interesting news stories and thought provoking commentary, but lately I have first and foremost been attracted to the clever artwork on the front page header. As an admirer of Mondrian, I particularly liked that cover (April 7, 1997). I compliment the creators of this art for their inventiveness, and suggest that such good work ought to get more exposure. Perhaps you could do a little story on the illustrations, the illustrators and their significance for the publication and the profession. I for one would like to see the art again.

Thank you for all your good work for chiropractic and the public.

Meredith Gonyea, PhD
President
Center for Studies in Health Policy, Inc.
Washington, DC

Dear Editor:

Managed chiropractic/medical care is a gift and a curse. The gift is that chiropractic has probably never been so recognized, accepted and available. The curse is that we are no longer self-employed. In fact, we are at the "whims" of our new employer. I personally would like to file a class-action suit against one managed care program that terminated my contract, of course citing that they did not need to give me a reason (for all I know, they may have the wrong person). I doubt that I am alone.

C.M. Wilkerson, DC
Carson, California
E-mail: chiro@earthlink.net

Dear Editor:

Dr. Sigmund Miller provides a most interesting article and explanation of the utilization review process ("Physical Medicine Utilization Review," Dynamic Chiropractic, Calif. Forum, March 24, 1997). It should be made available to all DCs, not just the California group. (Editor's note: We agree. Dr. Sigmund Miller's article will be appearing in other regional forums in the near future.)

Like most of the profession, I do not like the utilization review process, and am frustrated with it. It is most difficult to cope with the realization that, while most of us exercise sound clinical judgment, the few who have abused the system for so long bring a cloud of suspicion and a lack of clarity about how we in chiropractic manage patients.

However, Dr. Miller's excellent article shed some light, and indeed some hope that there is a future within the constraints of managed care. In particular, I was impressed with his statement: "In closing, debating whether utilization review is appropriate is irrelevant. It is important to spend less time worrying about who's right and more time deciding what's right."

As I have watched the Internet develop, and the online discussion lists which are becoming more and more popular each week, I see clearly the confusion and frustration bogging down our field at the national level. There is no agreement, no concordance, no general understanding among us of that which we are licensed to do. This must change, and change now during the managed care era. Otherwise, we will clearly be lost in the shuffle of national health care reform.

William Cockburn, DC, DABFE
Whittier, California
Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Examiners

Dear Editor:

While reading the "Report of My Findings" in the April 21 issue of DC, my attention was captured when I read the paragraph, "What percentage of the population has passed us by because they didn't recognize their local chiropractor as being knowledgeable about nutrition?", and I decided to tell you a little story.

I served the community of Las Vegas as a paramedic since 1981, and later as deputy coroner. I was well on my way into medical school at the University of Nevada-Reno, but I needed a way to supplement my education. Los Angeles was closer to Las Vegas, so I went to LACC and worked as many weekends and holidays in Las Vegas as I could. I just wanted to be a doctor; at the time I didn't think it mattered what kind. You see, when I was 19 I witnessed a police officer friend shot to death right before my eyes, and the worst thing was I didn't know a lick about what emergency procedures I needed to do or should or shouldn't do. Right then and there I knew that I would dedicate my life to serving others.

So I went to LACC, and my first year wasn't so bad. I suppose with all my medical training I was kind of stuck up; you see, I had never gone to a chiropractor before -- I just wanted to be a doctor.

About my third trimester, a fellow classmate was performing a thyroid exam on me during a lab portion of our studies, and wouldn't you just know it, she found a single solitary fixed nodule. It was the first time in my life I had no insurance; back then COBRA plans only ran for six months. It turned out to be thyroid cancer. Well, my fellow students and instructors had raffles, drawings, bake-offs, donations, etc., and I graduated with my class and even married my husband a year before graduating. So I guess there is something to chiropractic.

About nutrition: I asked for a sponsor to send me to the CCA convention this year so that I could teach those chiropractors that may have graduated earlier than me about nutrition. A chiropractic company was approached. They were kind enough to hear what I had to say; they even asked me to submit a lecture outline for them. The next thing I know, I'm a speaker at the CCA convention in June this year. Wow!

I'm determined to give back to this profession, and I have quite a lot to say about nutrition. I started with giving Thursday workshops for all the DCs in my area this past year and gave them all I know, so that is exactly how I will deliver my message to the CCA convention: that we are the most knowledgeable profession when it comes to clinical case management with regard to nutrition. Thank you and wish me luck.

Nancy Molina, DC
San Clemente, California