Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Anne Kristine Blake

is a woman that proves what is wrong with all 3 branches of Connecticut Government. Ms. Blake worked for the Connecticut Department of Retardation, the DMR. She made a legitimate complaint and then was set up and false allegations were made to ruin and silence her. Official Connecticut is about retaliating against whiste blowers. Had Blake not had a stamped passport proving she was out of the country, she could have been arrested and put in prison. I think Ms. Blake was sent to a Doctor who would medicate her to the point of her being committed. Official Connecticut is the Culture of Corruption.
-Steven G. Erickson
stevengerickson@yahoo.com

This post is a continuation of [this post] called, "Connecticut's Retaliation Machine"

CLICK PAGES BELOW FOR BIGGER VIEW

* * * *

Emails received from Kristine Blake:

POST all this and the ATTACHMENT on your JUDICIAL RETALIATION BLOG I SAW UNDER GOOGLE: Dr. PETER BENET...more is coming..put all of it on. I could not cut and paste it as it is PDF files....They were trying to kill me with lithium during my CHRO settlement.
Kristine THE www.CCHR.ORG filed the complaint for me. They are filing a NEW ONE for the LITHIUM prescribed with ZERO blood work...google LITHIUM SIDE EFFECTS.
Thank Kristine (PS The Hartford Police come and block my driveway all the time since my car accident)
----- Original Message -----
From: CCHR
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 5:54 PM
Subject: Peter Benet disciplined

Dear Anne,
I don't know if you heard, but Dr. Benet was discipined by the Board and it appears to be in response to your case. Have a look at the attached document.
It isn't much so far as discipline goes, but it's something. I plan on writing a response to their complaint to complain of "slap on the wrist." Their discipline is not even close to the harm he brought your way.
Sincerely,
Steve Wagner
Citizens Commission on Human Rights
800-869-2247

PDF attachment, cut and pasted (click image to make bigger):












Attached letter is a LIE....they NEVER CONTACTED ME DURING THEIR
investigation...I received the consent order from Steve Wagner from the
www.cchr.org in CALIFORNIA!!!!!! POST ALL THIS UNDER YOUR GOOGLE THING about
RETALIATION FACTORY....I AM GOING TO WASHINGTON.....
----- Original Message -----
From: "Filippone, Jennifer" <Jennifer.Filippone@ct.gov>
To: "Kristine"
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:49 AM
Subject: RE: Anne Kristine Blake - Dr. Peter Benet


Ms. Blake:

In follow-up to my e-mail from yesterday, attached is a copy of the June 23,
2008 letter and the June 17, 2008 letter from Regina Stankaitas to Steve
Wagner
.

Jennifer Filippone

________________________________

From: Filippone, Jennifer
Sent: Thu 7/31/2008 7:17 PM
To: 'Kristine'
Subject: RE: Anne Kristine Blake - Dr. Peter Benet


Dear Ms. Blake:

Lynn Townshend has forwarded your e-mail to me for response.

A letter dated June 23, 2008 was mailed to your Manchester address in
response to your e-mail to Governor Rell dated June 6, 2008 and to your
correspondence to Dr. Galvin dated May 27, 2008 and June 18, 2008. Also
attached was a copy of the letter from Regina Stankaitas, Chair of the
Connecticut Medical Examining Board, which was sent to Steve Wagner of the
Citizens Commission on Human Rights, in response to his recent letters to
Dr. Galvin and me concerning the outcome of your complaint.

I have arranged to have copies of these documents scanned and will send them
to you via e-mail on Friday August 1, 2008.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Filippone, Chief
Practitioner Licensing and Investigations Section
CT Department of Public Health
________________________________

From: Townshend, Lynn
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 11:09 AM
To: Filippone, Jennifer
Cc: 'Kristine'; Sandiaes, Linda
Subject: FW: Anne Kristine Blake - Dr. Peter Benet

________________________________

From: Kristine [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:08 AM
To: Townshend, Lynn
Cc: Sandiaes, Linda; Wojcik, Joshua
Subject: Re: Anne Kristine Blake - Dr. Peter Benet


Today is JULY 23rd, 2008. I have not received a response from my May 27th,
2008, letter YET!
I called CCHR and Charles Hulin in the AG'S office.

I have been advised to keep resending the same letter once a week. If that
is what it takes.

Very efficient office, DPH. 2 months to write a letter to a person who was
the victim of your investigation of Dr. Benet.
Mr. Hulin sent me a copy of the NEW COMPLAINT against Dr. Benet.

Thank you for looking into what is holding up the response to me.

Sincerely,
Anne Kristine Blake
[street address snipped]
Manchester, CT 06042-3207

----- Original Message -----
From: Townshend, Lynn Lynn.Townshend@ct.gov>
To: Kristine
Cc: attorney.general@po.state.ct.us ; Sandiaes, Linda
Linda.Sandiaes@po.state.ct.us> ; alan.cohn@wtnh.com ;
joshua.wojcik@cga.ct.gov
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 10:16 AM
Subject: RE: Anne Kristine Blake - Dr. Peter Benet


Good morning Mrs. Blake:


DPH is in receipt of your letter and will be following up with you shortly.

Many thanks,
Lynn Townshend
Executive Assistant to the Commissioner
CT DPH


________________________________

From: Kristine [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 9:30 AM
To: Townshend, Lynn
Subject: Anne Kristine Blake - Dr. Peter Benet
Importance: High













Flag this message

Fw: Chessie/ex-patient tells of BENET OVERBILLING INSURANCE

Saturday, August 30, 2008 5:27 PM
From:
To:
stevengerickson@yahoo.com
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 9:52 AM
Subject: RE: Chessie/ex-patient tells of BENET OVERBILLING INSURANCE

Dear Ms. Blake:
Thank you for forwarding this e-mail.

Although the Department of Public Health does not have jurisdiction over billing disputes, Chessie's allegations seem to include potential standard of care issues. If Chessie would like to file a complaint against Dr. Benet and provide us with a release for her medical and psychiatric records we can open an investigation. Unfortunately without a release for the psychiatric records, the Department cannot access the records and would not be able to investigate issues related to her psychotherapy.

Chessie should not hesitate to contact Kathleen Boulware at on my staff with any questions. Ms. Boulware can be reached at (860) 509-7552 or by e-mail at Kathleen.Boulware@ct.gov.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Filippone, Chief
Practitioner Licensing and Investigations Section
CT Department of Public Health

From: Kristine [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 11:57 AM
To: CCHR
Cc: Webmaster, DPH; Townshend, Lynn; Sandiaes, Linda; Wojcik, Joshua; Filippone, Jennifer; Waldman, Hilary; Hulin, Charles C.
Subject: Chessie/ex-patient tells of BENET OVERBILLING INSURANCE

chessie wrote:
As an ex-patient of Dr. Benet, I left last year when my insurance company was investigating the claims he was submitting for my appointments. I was going in for medication maintenance which was a less than 10 minute appointment and found out he was billing my insurance for a 45-50 min. psychotherapy appt. Cheating of this nature really angers me, so I found another doctor and left. He was kicked out of the insurance anyway.
Dr. Benet's method of doctoring is strictly with medication - that's his style. You say you're tired - he'll whip out his prescription pad and write you a script for Provigil. Tell him you can't sleep and you'll get Xyrem. Is your body achy? You'll get Neurontin. I always laughed to my husband about how he must be getting all sorts of perks for all the meds he pushes. And, I never found any of them significantly bettered the quality of my life. I'm more of the belief that cognitive therapy along with the right antidepressant is a better approach, and would have found another doctor eventually - I was just wanting to experiment with taking different meds in hopes of finding the magic pill that would solve all of life's problems for me.
Another thing - I always investigate medications before agreeing to take them. I do my own research on side effects, interactions with other meds, etc. If I have any issues about them, I ask the doctor to explain those issues. Even though a professional prescribes meds, I feel we all need to have self-responsibility, and owe it to ourselves to get the facts on whatever we are taking.
And lastly, I bet if someone did an investigation to see how many of his patients are on social security disability (where he wrote the disability recommendation to the court for them), there would be, let's say, a much higher number of people than from other doctors. ;)


4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dr. Benets attorneys HALLORAN & SAGE have gotten what they wished for......my Small Claims suit has been officially moved to REGUALR DOCKET. They are fully aware I do not have the money to pay an attorney....and so the system remains about who has the most $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!

Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.ct.gov/ag/lib/ag/press_releases/2002/health/pmi1.pdf
Blumenthals lawsuit against BENET, "revoking or suspending" Benets license on February 14, 2002~

Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connecticut Attorney General's Office

Press Release

Blumenthal Finds Anthem, Psych Management
Denied/Limited Coverage To Vulnerable Patients

February 14, 2002

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal today released a report finding that Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield (Anthem) and Psych Management Inc. (PMI), the company it hired to manage behavioral health claims for some 600,000 enrollees in its managed care plans, arbitrarily denied medically necessary mental health care for vulnerable patients.

"This story is about a physician who sacrificed his patients for money and power -- abandoning his sacrosanct obligation to help them, or at least do them no harm. This story is also about a managed care industry operating without the most basic safeguards and protections -- an industry that ignores reprehensible conduct so long as it benefits the bottom line," said Blumenthal. "This report presents a picture of a physician driven by the promise of wealth to disregard health needs. More important, it starkly dramatizes the dark side and dynamics of the managed care industry, which not only permit but even encourage such failings."

In 1996, prior to its merger with Anthem, Blue Cross/Blue Shield decided to "carve out" the behavioral health management of its BlueCare plan to a subcontractor that specialized in behavioral health. Anthem selected PsychCare, Inc., a non-profit corporation founded by Dr. Peter Benet, a psychiatrist practicing in Hartford. Dr. Benet formed PsychCare for the purpose of bidding for the right to manage behavioral health coverage for Anthem's enrollees. PsychCare eventually had 33 "members" -- physicians -- each of whom contributed $5000 to fund the initial operations of the non-profit.

According to Blumenthal, Dr. Benet then "devised a plan to bilk PsychCare of its assets and profit personally" by organizing a second, for-profit stock corporation, PMI. PMI entered into a "management contract" whereby PsychCare transferred all of its existing assets and business responsibilities -- including the Anthem contract and its provider network -- to PMI. PMI never compensated PsychCare for the transfer of its assets, approximately $147,000. At the same time, Dr. Benet and his wife were given 2500 shares of PMI -- 25% of the outstanding stock -- essentially for free. Dr. Benet also received 3000 shares as a reward for his performance. Dr. Benet eventually came to own 6000 shares representing 42% of PMI's stock, giving him a controlling interest in PMI.

With a controlling interest in PMI, Dr. Benet's financial fate was inextricably tied to PMI's financial performance. Any cuts in services to enrollees, lower reimbursement rates for participating doctors and hospitals, and payments withheld to doctors would fatten PMI's bottom line and Dr. Benet's wallet. As PMI's Medical Director, Dr. Benet was responsible for mental health and substance abuse care coverage decisions. In this capacity, he coerced and manipulated PMI and its Board into making a series of questionable financial and coverage decisions, all to his personal financial benefit.

"As Anthem knew or should have known, PMI and Dr. Benet made decisions repeatedly causing denial of medically necessary coverage and care to Anthem enrollees," Blumenthal said. "Dr. Benet pressured PMI care managers to deny coverage based on arbitrary caps and guidelines, which in turn reflected Anthem rates of compensation and utilization. He promulgated arbitrary coverage rules having no relation to medical necessity of the claims involved. He also stood to profit, and did profit personally from the denial of coverage and care to the patients that Anthem and PMI were obligated to deal with fairly and in good faith."

In April 1999, $100,000 in debt to the IRS and desiring to by a home for his second wife, Dr. Benet persuaded PMI's board of directors to issue a dividend that he had reason to know, and had been advised by the CFO, PMI could not afford. Dr. Benet essentially hid from the Board preliminary financial reports for the first quarter of 1999, which showed a loss. He also failed to disclose that the amount owed to providers but not yet billed had yet to be determined for 1998. Instead, Dr. Benet told the Board that PMI had $1 million in profit available for a dividend payment. The Board approved a dividend payment of more than $440,000, including $161,700 to Dr. Benet.

Because of the dividend, PMI was forced to improperly withhold approximately $750,000 in reimbursements due to providers in 1998. The PMI Board decided not to inform providers about the decision to withhold the reimbursement. Eventually, Anthem learned that PMI had not reimbursed the providers and ordered Dr. Benet to release the reimbursement. The reimbursement was made to providers on September 7, 2000.

At the same meeting where the PMI Board chose not to inform providers about the reimbursement withhold, the Board gave Dr. Benet an additional 1,200 shares of stock on the grounds that his performance "had warranted recognition..." Dr. Benet also requested and received from PMI a $45,000 advance on salary to help him in resolving a "real estate situation."

During 1999 and 2000, the PMI care managers came under increasing pressure from Dr. Benet to deny coverage and reduce utilization. He began meeting with care managers every day to review cases, particularly the status of enrollees who were psychiatric inpatients, and would pressure some managers two or three times a day in an effort to force them to restrict coverage. According to care managers, Dr. Benet focused only on the number of days the patient was in the hospital and rejected the clinical information concerning why a patient needed to remain as an inpatient.

In addition, Dr. Benet:

Promulgated arbitrary guidelines designed to reduce utilization, which became more restrictive over time. He would terminate coverage in cases he called "chronic" even when the enrollee involved was a child.
Established, in writing, an arbitrary cap of nine covered intensive outpatient visits in 30 days for patients in need of substance abuse treatment. Coverage was also formally capped at one residential or intensive outpatient episode per calendar year. Dr. Benet's caps had nothing to do with clinical criteria and were seen by care managers as having no relation to the actual needs of enrollees.
Employed a policy of "tapering" whereby care managers were required to taper down the amount of coverage being granted in particular cases. If coverage was granted for 12 outpatient therapy visits in a 3 month period, for example, PMI care managers were required to grant coverage for fewer visits in subsequent periods even though the patient involved might be more sick than he or she had been.
Imposed an arbitrary limitation on coverage for inpatient care that paralleled the amount of compensation PMI was receiving from Anthem. Thus if Anthem was paying PMI an amount sufficient to pay for seven or eight inpatients at one time, Dr. Benet would become very concerned if the PMI inpatient census exceeded that number and would pressure managers to limit coverage.
Authorized differing levels of coverage based on an enrollee's type of health care coverage. If Anthem and PMI "insured" the coverage -- paying all claims for medically necessary care -- Dr. Benet would authorize coverage for dramatically fewer days or visits than he would if the enrollee's employer retained the risk and paid claims out of its own pocket.
Sought to admit patients into hospitals with the lowest reimbursement rates so that PMI would save money on those patients' care. These hospitals were also more likely to discharge patients faster. This practice particularly hurt children, who were often left languishing in emergency rooms for 24 or even 48 hours in hospitals that had beds for them because Dr. Benet was trying to locate a bed at a less expensive hospital, even though that hospital might be hours away from the child's family.
At the same time that he forced dramatic and harmful cutbacks in coverage and care available to patients, Dr. Benet spent extravagantly on luxury office space and furniture, automobiles, lavish parties, and redundant and over-priced new executives.

When radical cutbacks in PMI's coverage of medically necessary care failed to stem the financial problems, Dr. Benet directed managers to "hold" checks due to be mailed to providers. PMI managers would cut checks to providers, but would place the checks in a locked box rather than mail them. By misrepresenting that payment to providers had been made, PMI was able to obtain reimbursement from Anthem under false pretenses.

According to Blumenthal, Anthem must share the blame for PMI and Dr. Benet's misdeeds.

"When Anthem subcontracts, it remains responsible for keeping the promises it makes to its enrollees. Any failure by PMI is also ultimately Anthem's failure," said Blumenthal. "Anthem in effect created PMI, trained its staff, dictated the terms of its contracts, provided all its operating income, and imbued PMI with a cost cutting business culture that became PMI's central goal. In an effort to cut its own costs, Anthem accepted a PMI bid that was so low it virtually guaranteed that PMI would deny coverage for medically necessary treatment. Anthem either knew or should have known of PMI's misconduct."

Dr. Benet was eventually forced out of PMI, in October 2000, after Anthem and the Board learned that he had been consistently lying to them. Despite his years of mismanaging PMI into a dangerous deficit, injuring enrollees, and lying to Anthem and PMI Board members, Dr. Benet received a $400,000 golden handshake paid for by Anthem.

Perhaps more disturbing than the payout to Dr. Benet, Anthem continues to contract with PMI for its behavioral health carveout. In fact, Anthem re-selected PMI in the summer of 2001, when it put all three of its commercial behavioral health contracts -- BlueCare, State Employee, and Century Preferred -- out to bid "Although Dr. Benet is no longer with PMI, the arbitrary coverage caps and guidelines apparently are still in use by PMI and Anthem, conflicting with Anthem's contractual obligations. None of Anthem's contractual materials mention the arbitrary coverage rules employed by PMI or the tremendous pressure on and within PMI to cutback on medically necessary care," Blumenthal said. "In fact, Anthem's written promises and assurances, in light of the facts now known, are affirmative misrepresentations to patients concerning the coverage available under its plans, and the circumstances of plan administration."

Blumenthal has called on the State Department of Public Health to initiate proceedings to suspend or revoke the license of Dr. Benet to practice medicine on the grounds of "negligent conduct in the practice of medicine." He is also initiating litigation to ensure that Connecticut citizens enrolled in managed care plans administered by Anthem and PMI are protected from arbitrary and unfair coverage determinations liable to deny them medically necessary behavioral health care. In addition, Blumenthal is urging the legislature to enact a law protecting patients from carveout bias and misconduct, and ensuring that managed care companies are held accountable for their carveout's misdeeds.

View the Anthem and PMI report (pdf-160kb)

Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:11:00 PM  
Blogger Anne-Kristine said...

I always liked Blumenthal. He works for the people of Connecticut, and does not cower down to the corrupt system.
Too bad that with all he had against Dr. Benet, he still was unable to get the MEDICAL BOARD to revoke this "killers" license.

Thanks to Steve for shedding some light on how rigged the system is to take down those that stand up to the madness.

Thursday, September 06, 2012 5:18:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


View My Stats