Bill could make health workers pay for FBI checks

September 13, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Thousands of medical workers in Indiana would have to pay for their own FBI background checks under a lawmaker's proposed change to the state's system for obtaining health care licenses.

The plan, being sought by state Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, would replace the current policy that relies on the honesty of nurses and others to accurately report arrests and convictions when applying for licenses.

Miller said Monday that she hasn't worked out all the details, including whether the required check would apply to just new applicants or also those seeking renewals.

The bill has the potential to affect more than 250,000 Indiana workers in up to 24 categories of licensed professionals, including doctors, dentists, pharmacists, nurses, chiropractors, hypnotists, dietitians and even veterinarians.

Miller, a registered nurse, said the bill would hold health workers to the highest standards while avoiding any cost to the cash-strapped state.

"I know the importance of having professional caregivers who are highly moral and ethical," Miller said.

An FBI national background check would cost health care workers about $75 in addition to the $50 they already pay to get a license, said Steve Johnson, executive director of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Association.

The proposal would also require county prosecutors in Indiana to report any convictions of licensed health professionals, giving the Indiana Professional Licensing Agency real-time information about health workers. The agency already has rules in place to deal with licensed workers who break the law, but doesn't always get up-to-date information about recent convictions and mostly relies on self-reporting by applicants.

Most caregivers are honest, Miller said, but an investigation by The Indianapolis Star found several instances in which nurses failed to report arrests or convictions on their license renewal applications.

The newspaper reported in August that a Greenfield nurse was convicted last year of intimidation after he waved a loaded gun at a motorist. An Indianapolis nurse was convicted of felony drunken driving last year after a history of alcohol problems already had resulted in his nursing license being put on probation.

The state's nursing board didn't know about those crimes. The state can't afford to do background checks on the 91,500 RNs and 29,400 LPNs who work around the state, director Sean Gorman said.

Most hospitals already require background checks, but advocates say they aren't required in all situations—especially in nursing homes.

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller said other states that pay for background checks can spend millions of dollars. He said Miller's proposal is a good solution that would not cost the state anything.

"You don't necessarily always need to throw money at a problem like this," Zoeller said.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

  2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

  3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  4. If you only knew....

  5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.