Opinion ID: 2633430
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Unbiased Tribunal

Text: The Commission, in accordance with the existing statutes, consisted of one licensed physician from each of Washington's congressional districts, two physician's assistants, and four members of the public, all appointed by the Governor. RCW 18.71.015. The public members are limited to people who are not members of other health profession boards and do not have a fiduciary obligation to a facility rendering health services regulated by the Commission, or have a material or financial interest in the rendering of health services regulated by the commission. RCW 18.71.015. Thus, professionals like Dr. Nguyen are judged by panels consisting largely of professional peers, rather than solely by administrative law judges or other judicial officers. [8] We held in Haley and Heinmiller the special expertise of professional peers sitting on a professional disciplinary body can give sufficient content to general terms like moral turpitude to withstand vagueness challenges. Haley, 117 Wash.2d at 733, 818 P.2d 1062; Heinmiller, 127 Wash.2d at 605, 903 P.2d 433. This special expertise also serves to protect the professional from uninformed disciplinary decisions. There is nothing to suggest from the statutory makeup of the Commission that Dr. Nguyen did not receive the benefit of an unbiased tribunal.