Finally, we have Dr. Belkin, Grace’s doctor when she was brought in here after her first seizure. He’s difficult to read, but from what I know of him, I wouldn’t be surprised if he takes it personally that the doctor who assumed treatment of his patient could have made such a stupid mistake.
All in all, I think it’s pretty safe to say that I’m fucked.
“We’re meeting this morning in order to determine what, if any, disciplinary action would be appropriate for Dr. Jace Churchill,” Dr. Preston starts. “The committee has looked over the allegations surrounding your case, Dr. Churchill, and we are prepared to hear your testimony if you’d like to begin.”
“Grace Miller, the patient in question, was initially referred to me by Dr. Belkin. She came into the hospital after an idiopathic seizure. When it was discovered that she had an oligodendroglioma, she was referred into my care,” I start.
“Dr. Churchill, at that time, were you aware that there was a clinical trial that would be starting within the months following your initial contact with your patient?” Dr. Belkin asks.
And I thought I was going to be able to get through my initial statement before they set about crucifying me. “No,” I answer, “it was some time thereafter that I was sent an email discussing the trial.”
“Go on,” Dr. Preston prompts.
“When I did find out about the clinical trial, I began to consider the possibility that some of my patients may benefit from their inclusion,” I continue.
Dr. Belkin interrupts again, “How many patients of yours have oligodendroglioma?”
“I’m sure that’s in the file,” I tell him.
“Do you not know how many patients of yours have oligodendroglioma?” Dr. Belkin asks again.
“I have three patients with the condition,” I answer. “The first has phase three of the condition and thus wouldn’t be permitted entry into the clinical trial. The second patient was admitted in good faith and meets all criteria. The third, Grace, has phase two oligodendroglioma, and although she doesn’t meet the duration criteria, I thought her inclusion in the trial might have a positive impact on her prognosis.”
“You were aware at the time that you were putting forth an invalid candidate?” Dr. Quinten asks.
“I was,” I answer.
“Didn’t it strike you as a grave risk to yourself, to the patient, and to this hospital, not to mention to the results of the study to put forward a patient that didn’t meet the requirements of that study?” Dr. Quinten pursues.
“I was aware of the risks.”
“I’m not just speaking of the professional risks, Dr. Churchill,” Dr. Quinten continues. “The girl could have had an unforeseen reaction, or she could have skewed the results of the study, potentially preventing a helpful drug from being approved or even enabling a dangerous drug to slip through the cracks. Do you understand this?”
“I don’t think that a single patient in a clinical trial-” I start.
“Did you or did you not understand the risks apart from those to your professional status?” Dr. Quinten asks.
This isn’t going so well.
“I understood all of the risks regarding what I was planning to do,” I answer.
“Then why did you do it?” Dr. Star asks.
I’m about to gain her sympathy, but I’m going to just as quickly lose any chance of her voting for leniency.
“I had become quite fond of this patient, and I wanted to go the extra mile to ensure she had every chance she could to live a longer, happier life,” I answer. “I was advocating for my patient.”
There’s only one way this next part can go, and it’s going there quickly.
“You were having a sexual relationship with this pat
ient prior to her admission to the trial, is that not true?” Dr. Jepsen asks.
“Not at the time she was accepted into the trial,” I answer.
“But you were having a sexual relationship with her before the commencement of the clinical trial?” Dr. Star asks.
I hesitate, but it’s a useless flourish. “Yes,” I answer.