We Get Letters

A Bad Precedent

Dear Editor:

I applaud the new formation of the Society of Chiropractic Management Consultants (SCMC) and would like more information and an application to join.

But I found it very ironic and possibly contradictory to see, while the bylaws are critical of involving religion and using percentage contracts, that Drs. David Singer and William Harris are members and officers of this society. It is well known that Dr. Singer is associated with the Scientology cult and makes no bones about it, and that Dr. Harris has exclusively used percentage contracts of one-third to one-half for years with his clients.

I think it is a bad precedent for this society to have either of these consultants as members, let alone as officers. Their presence appears to contradict those bylaws and casts suspicion as to the very purpose of the society. Indeed, Drs. Singer and Harris' membership appears equivalent to Vice President Dan Quayle being a member of Phi Beta Kappa, or Dice Clay being a member of the National Organization of Women. In other words, the presence of Drs. Singer and Harris as officers invalidates the basic tenants of their own society when, in fact, the officers are well-known violators of their own bylaws.

The concept of ethical regulations of consultants is great, but the membership of these two consultants flies in the face of the very purpose of the society.

James C. Smith, D.C.
Warner Robins, Georgia

 

---

Editor's note: "DC" sent Dr. James Smith's letter to SCMC President Richard Vincent, D.C., to allow him to respond to Dr. Smith's concerns.

Dear Dr. Smith:

Thank you for your letter regarding the newly formed Society of Chiropractic Management Consultants (SCMC). I appreciate your interest, concern, and approval of the formation of such an organization.

Having served as a state society president, a member and chairman of the state board, president of the Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards, and the National Board of Chiropractic Examiners, I am extremely sensitive to those problems associated with a new organization.

The SCMC was formed out of the need for a service organization that would act as a forum and an informational resource for its members. Essential to the organization was a constitution and bylaws, criteria for membership, and a code of ethical business conduct. The organization would act as a central exchange of information essential to the industry, thus assuring the chiropractic profession and those who the member consultants serve, (of) ethical, competent management services.

Since the initial conference of November 1990, we have had two meetings that have enabled us to reach a unanimous consensus in regard to the establishment of a name, the skeletal framework of a constitution and bylaws, guidelines for membership, as well as a code of business conduct.

At the Dallas, May 14, 1991 meeting, three officers of the SCMC were elected: Dr. Richard E. Vincent, president; Dr. Charles Gibson, vice president; and Larry Markson, secretary/treasurer. In the interest of membership participation, each of those present were given a committee assignment.

On May 14, 1991, by unanimous vote, the members in attendance to include those who you referenced in your letter of May 31, 1991 agreed that they:

• shall not sign to a practice management agreement or contract, any students until after their graduation from chiropractic college;

   

• shall operate and charge on a fee-for-service basis rather than on a fee schedule based on a percentage of services rendered or income;

   

• shall not promote any specific religion(s) nor provide religious counseling of any kind as part of the management services;

   

• shall not engage in self-dealing or conflicts of interest with their clients;

   

• shall not engage in misleading or deceptive advertising nor imply or give a guarantee of results to their clients.

Should any current member, after ratification, of the SCMC not comply with the May 14 agreement, he/she, after due process, would no longer be eligible for membership in the organization.

I am of the opinion that any current member of the SCMC must be judged upon their conduct and actions subsequent to the meeting of May 14, 1991.

During the hectic and turbulent days following the recognition of the Chiropractic Council on Education (CCE) by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the CCE admitted chiropractic colleges to varying levels of status irrespective of their past, as long as they agreed to and met criteria.

In the name of fairness, if any individual conducts his management firm in accord with that of May 14, 1991 agreement, they are entitled to membership. If, after due process, the evidence supports the contrary, then the rights and privileges of membership should be denied that individual.

We are new and, without doubt, have a road to travel, and if given the time and the support, the SCMC will prove to be another forward step in the evolution of our profession and those who serve it.

Richard E. Vincent, D.C., F.I.C.C., President
Society of Chiropractic Management Consultants (SCMC)