Multitasking or Malpractice? Maryland Surgeon and State Delegate Reprimanded After Participating in Hearings During Surgeries

This week, we discussed the case of a surgeon who left an operating room to eat a meal and then fell asleep in his car — missing the operation. Now, there is a new case involving a Democratic representative and surgeon from Maryland who participated in legislative meetings while operating. The multitasking of Dr. Terri Hill, a state delegate and board-certified plastic surgeon, led to a relatively light sanction: a reprimand and a $15,000 fine by the state physician’s board.

In a remote public hearing in February, Hill presented a bill while performing “major abdominal surgery.” According to FOX 45, the Zoom call showed a solid blue background but Hill was shown in her surgical gown. She was recorded saying “I’m at work, yes. You’re at work. I’m at work.”

In a March legislative session, she again appeared in an operating room for a “major abdominal and back surgery.” 

Hill was found to have engaged in “unprofessional conduct in the practice of medicine” in joining at least two Zoom meetings with other lawmakers in the last year during surgeries.

The case is reminiscent of a prior case that we discussed involving Dr. Scott Green who appeared remotely in a Sacramento Superior Court for a trial of a traffic violation during an operation.

In this case, there is an added twist. Hill insists that the patient consented to the bizarre arrangement. However, the patient said that she does not recall such a conversation and thus challenged the account that she consented to multitasking during her own operation. It would certainly seem a curious request of a patient.

Hill accepted the fine but downplayed the offense and punishment as “constructive criticism”:

“As a physician and a professional, I always look for ways to improve my practice. Sometimes this includes accepting constructive criticism from others. I accept the Board’s decision that I could have done better.”

I think that there is little question that she “could have done better.” What is astonishing is that such a clearly unprofessional and dangerous practice is a matter for a simple fine rather than a suspension of her license. The patient denies knowledge of any consent and even the request to allow multitasking in a surgery should be viewed as improper.

There is also a question of legal liability. The operations (as with the one earlier this week) appear to have been successful. The patient quoted in the article could claim trauma after-the-fact but she did receive the services of her chosen doctor and did not appear to have suffered any injury. That would make for a difficult tort case.

Hill represents the state’s 12th Legislative District in Baltimore.

46 thoughts on “Multitasking or Malpractice? Maryland Surgeon and State Delegate Reprimanded After Participating in Hearings During Surgeries”

  1. Given the systemic black privilege in this country it is not unreasonable to suspect that this woman’s light reprimand was due to her race.

    1. Ah, systemic black privilege in all its false and fraudulent splendor – the splendor begot by craven, emasculated, phantom-guilt-ridden, milquetoast citizens who are counterintuitively and inconceivably allowed to vote (turnout in 1788 was 11.6% by design).

      The Israelite slaves were out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers, and on their merry way to the Promised Land. But then the Israelite slaves had the intellect, acumen and capacity sufficient to the task.

      The British slaves (sold by their African tribal leaders) held over from British rule in America were clueless after emancipation, and Lincoln illegally refused to obey and enforce the required compassionate deportation in contemporary immigration law, but then, that was Lincoln’s modus operandi since ignoring the constitutional right and freedom of secession and the sovereignty of the CSA, as fundamental law would have it.

    2. Yesterday Young Wrote:

      “CRT has bled into corporations so deeply that now banks, communications companies, and soda companies are telling their employees to BE LESS WHITE.

      Since more than 54% of all murders are committed by black men, about 7% of the population, one wonders if that is good advice. But never mind”.

      But Today Young Writes:

      “Given the systemic black privilege in this country it is not unreasonable to suspect that this woman’s light reprimand was due to her race”.

      See that?? Yesterday Young told us Blacks were disproportionately prone to murder. But today Young notes that Blacks enjoy “systemic privilege”. ..What a pivot..!

      Whatever Young really thinks, we can depend on Young to comment when Turley’s subject concerns a Black person.

      Helpfully the professor always adds a photograph for columns such as these. So commenters like Young can express their righteous indignation.

      1. OJ Simpson is a murderer with privilege.

        Bill Cosby is rapist with privilege.

        How ironic.

  2. Ask this doctor if she would like the pilot of the plane she is flying across the Atlantic or Pacific to be doing a zoom call with a legislative body mid-flight. Ask the doctor if she would like the fireman carrying her down a ladder from the fifth floor about him doing a zoom meeting. Ask her if she would like the lawyer who may be defending her in a negligence suit to be taking a zoom call mid-trial. Ask her if she would like a doctor operating on HER child to be zooming.

    To me, in my own little humble opinion, it seems like a lack of respect and concern for patients if a surgeon, or any professional in a very serious occupation is “multi-tasking” during what I am sure is a very important moment in the life of the person being operated on.

    1. Despite claims to the contrary, human beings are incapable of “multi-tasking”. We simply can’t do two things at once. We can engage in, to some extent, rapid task switching, but it has been demonstrated that this usually results in poor quality results in both tasks since we never completely change our focus at that point.

    2. The pilots are likely playing games or looking at porn on their cell phones anyway.

      What this shows is how easy surgery actually is. Cut here, cut there, sew there. Easy peasey! Meat is meat.

    3. My wife’s Obgyn had to watch the finish of a hockey game in the doctor’s lounge before performing a Cesarean on her (my wife and child survived). Doctors are also people. I think.

  3. How did the patient consent? Was she given anesthesia, and as they were counting down, “10, 9, you’re getting very sleepy now, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, close your eyes if you consent to my participating in a Zoom legislative hearing during this opera…”

    How in the world does a surgeon participate in a Zoom call during surgery? During a break, fine. During lunch, fine. But during surgery?

    That should be malpractice.

  4. I have not practiced professional malpractice law, mostly defense under E & O policies in a number of years and retired from the practice of law in 2015.
    Nevertheless a few thoughts.
    One, “Informed Consent” must be in writing. At least that was the law or the Standard of Care in California.
    Two, no insurance company, in my many years of practice, would write or sell an E & O policy which covered a medical professional who was so-called multitasking while operating on a patient.
    Three, no professional medical … doctor … group or association would permit one of its group or association members to operate while so-called multitasking.
    Four, no hospital would would permit one of its employee medical … doctor(s) … to operate while so-called multitasking.
    Five, no reasonable person (patient) would sign or orally agree to permitting a medical professional, doctor, to operate on him or her while so-called multitasking.
    Six, no reasonable, competent and ethical medical … doctor … would ask a patient to agree to permit him or her to operate on him or her while so-called multitasking.
    Seven, “led to a relatively light sanction … by the state physician’s board.” which the professor doesn’t profess to describe or identify the members of or the qualifications, if any, of the persons on the “… physician’s Board.”
    Eight, the professor professes “… The patient …. did not appear to have suffered any injury. May I suggest that such an opinion may be more than a little premature. As a tort professor, but certainly no a practicing, income earning civil trial attorney the professor demonstrates a disturbing lack of thought or creativity in not identifying or suggesting pleadable causes of action.
    Last, but far, far, far, from least, the medical … doctor … professional in question “ … represents the state’s 12th Legislative District in Baltimore. Accordingly, the medical …. doctor … professional is a politician. When I was growing up in a political, but not officeholding, family there was a question:
    How do you know a politician is lying?
    His (her) lips are moving. [Not!, that he (she) is saying anything!]
    I suspect the representative “… of state’s 12th Legislative District in Baltimore.” … has a a bright future.
    Her future, I suspect, will be to be reelected, then elected to a high office. President , or at least, Vice President of the United States has more than a little historical precedent.
    dennis hanna

  5. Critical Race Theory just went out the window with the waste water; a Minority (Race and Gender) [IS A DOCTOR!].

    How is that possible?

  6. OT

    Darren et al., for your edification:



    Obama and Harris will never be “natural born citizens” and will never be eligible for president or vice president, support from communist party headquarters in Cornell notwithstanding.

    Darren Smith says:
    October 27, 2021 at 5:06 PM

    It might be helpful to consider that Vice President Harris was born in Oakland, CA. Her parents were not granted diplomatic immunity at the time of her birth nor were they part of the diplomatic corps of any foreign government. Therefore according to United States v. Won Kim Ark’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, she is a citizen of the United States and eligible to hold the presidency in so far as the citizenship requirement is concerned, should that position become available to her.

    REF: Cornell Law –

    “The post you linked to [Cornell] is not authoritative. Whoever wrote it – some law student, perhaps? – doesn’t understand the issue – the writer is totally confused. The part of the quote which I highlighted in yellow, is false.” [1st clause]

    “‘Under the 14th Amendment’s Naturalization Clause and the Supreme Court case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 US. 649, anyone born on U.S. soil and subject to its jurisdiction is a natural born citizen’, regardless of parental citizenship. This type of citizenship is referred to as birthright citizenship.’

    “The part of the quote I highlighted in green [2nd clause], may be true, depending on the circumstances. e.g., in the Wong Kim Ark case, his parents were subjects of the emperor of China. But they were domiciled here: i.e., they lived here permanently and were not here in the service of their emperor. So when their child was born here, he was “subject to” the jurisdiction of the US. Hence, he was born a naturalized US citizen [he was naturalized by Sec. 1 of the 14th Amdt] – but he was not a natural born citizen because he didn’t get his US citizenship from his parents – but by operation of Sec. 1 of the 14th Amdt.

    “A natural born citizen gets his citizenship from his parents.

    “A naturalized citizen gets his citizenship by operation of a man made law, such as Sec. 1 of the 14 th Amdt.”

    – Anonymous Constitutional Scholar

    1. What they’all wanted is what President Susan Rice is providing in “free stuff,” envirowackoism and illegal foreign invasion, on orders from the very ineligible General Secretary and Coup D’etat in America Leader Barack “Barry Soetoro” Obama, at the direction of the global communist Deep Deep State. They’all get it in spades.

  7. I would like to comment here about something not germane to the topic at hand because I think it needs to be discussed and this is as good a forum as any.

    The so-called stunt that either Terry McAuliffie or the Lincoln Project attempted against Youngkin obviously blew up in their faces and it is now being discussed as a political misstep. I feel it deserves much more attention due to the fact that it tried to make an innocent guy out to be a Nazi and a racist. That is disgusting. Now we have partisan HACKS like “historian” Larry Sabato saying it was a political miscalculation as he downplays any effect it will have on the Democrat in the race. Hey Larry, if a Trump team did this what would you be saying?

    For 60 years we have been told how ugly Nixon was and how dirty the Republicans are, but please tell me what can be dirtier than what Hillary did to Trump with the traitor talk. Or maybe remember that Biden was in the room, with OBAMA, in January 2016 when the taps were being placed. We had Obama’s IRS going after Tea Party groups. We had Harry Reid saying that Romney paid no taxes and we had Biden saying Romney would “put y’all back in chains”. Now we have the Clinton bagman McAuliffe trying to smear an honest man with a Nazi label.

    The two most egregious examples of liberal hypocrisy are their constant complaining about money in politics, as they outspend Republicans every time (and not with $10.00 contributions) and how dirty Republicans supposedly play. Ooh, ooh, I have another one: Dems love to complain about Republican gerrymandering. It is laughable.

    1. Larry Sabato saying it was a political miscalculation as he downplays any effect it will have on the Democrat in the race

      Our Final 2016 picks
      Clinton 322, Trump 216; 50-50 Senate; GOP holds House

      I had my haircut this morning at my redneck barbershop in Mechanicsville, VA. My barber and his clients are Yellow-dog Democrats and have nothing good to say about Republicans, just like me. However, everyone agreed at the barbershop that McAwful is a despicable politician, a Clintonite and lying, wealthy opportunist. None of them care for Youngkin because he has no political experience, but they do know McAuliffe. No love there. What the Lincoln Project did likely gave McAuliffe the shlts, and he knows he is done. Sabato is still the hack he was when he predicted Hitlery would win

      How will Youngkin do? My barber and his clients today said civil war is near, with the dividing line being drawn between rural vs city. I merely asked him to hook me up with some 9 mm ammo


  8. Anyone and everyone who draws attention to such irresponsible medical “practice” will be called out .. as a racist. ‘Nuff said!

  9. I think the patient that she said consented, in an apparent lie, may have a case. The hospital should have suspended her for opening them up for a major disaster.

    1. I have little doubt the patient is already getting calls from ambulance chasers, and yea, this is one of those rare occasions where the ambulance chasers might have a case. A $15,000 fine is just the beginning for this showboat-Democrat sawbones.

  10. This was a way for the doctor to show her fellow politicians how wicked great she is and how her job is cooler than anyone else’s job. Does anyone think that if she was a short order cook she would have joined in the zoom call with her dirty apron on? Just a pretentious show of vainglory.

  11. C’mon, man! After Toobin, is anyone really surprised at how lefties conduct Zoom calls?? They’re slouching toward Gomorrah, “and with sanctimony.”

    1. How in the name of Heaven and Earth did that reprobate Toobin get his job back?

      Was that not absolute, irrefutable, extant, defacto, unacceptable, unforgivable moral turpitude?

      Perhaps staff counsel omitted the clause in “modernity.”

      1. Well, George, I don’t know how he got it back, but we both know that leftwing thinking is all mental masturbation to begin with.

  12. As a retired physician, who has previously been a hospital staff president and chief of medicine for a national health plan, as well as being an internist and critical care physician, I find her behavior irresponsible. In most institutions that I worked in she would likely have been fined, placed on suspension and instructed to attend CME on appropriate patient care management and then been under direct observation and monitoring for a significant period of time. A repeat of this action would likely have lead to her dismissal. I multitask in the office and on rounds or in an ICU when 2 codes where ongoing and I was the only one there to manage them. Otherwise the patient at hand is your sole focus. Less than that is unacceptable. I also served on multiple review panels of malpractice cases over the years.

  13. Their Oath is based upon “Do no harm.”. What harm did she do?

    Had something gone wrong….you would have your harm possibly…but it did not.

    Now commonsense tells us that the potential for harm and the kind of harm it could be…..the Doctor should have stuck to her primary job….attending to the Patient.

    Here wise choice would have been to cancel one or the other….the Zoom Call or the Surgical procedure….but cancelling the one would have harmed her income.

    Did she place revenue above the Patient’s safety perhaps?

    Or did she ensure there was no risk to the Patient and take every reasonable precaution to include obtaining the Patient’s agreement?

    Bad choices will get you bad results.

  14. Interesting. My only question is are you using speech to text to write your articles Professor?

    I’m assuming that’s the case and that you really meant, “Sacramento Superior Court” and not as you ( or your Speech to text program) wrote, “Sacramental Superior Court”…

    I realize those speech to text programs really help with multitasking, but they do tend to make a boo boo once in a while. 😜

  15. She’s pretty lucky nothing went awry. No HIPPA violations, no apparent loss of privacy, not sure if there was any injury other than post-surgical WTH?

  16. I don’t particularly care if she is a Democrat, Republican, Unregistered, whatever. This is gross malpractice whoever you are.

  17. What!!? Good grief, there is a huge difference between doing laundry, cooking, and being on a Zoom call multitasking AND having someone’s life in your hands on an operating table and doing a Zoom call. Have people lost their minds? Did they ever have a mind. Gross!

Comments are closed.