The following news release has been sent to newspapers all over the country. It is time for the vast majority of chiropractors to stand up for those principles that make chiropractic special, separate and distinct. If you have not taken the opportunity to join and support this effort please do so today. T!m Langley, D.C. Vinings Chiropractic 3599 Atlanta Road, Suite A-9 Smyrna, GA 30080 678-842-9911 FAX: 678-842-9922 drtim@viningschiropractic.com www.viningschiropractic.com and Mayor Stephanie Grenier, DC DrSteph@QualityofLifeChiro.com www.QualityofLifeChiro.com Quality of Life Chiropractic Center 2559 Pharr Avenue Dacula, GA 30019 678-442-1260 Ofc 678-442-1225 Fax 678-409-7823 Cell Watchdog Group Finds Corporate and Legal Problems Within Chiropractic Accrediting Agency October 16, 2002: Doctors for Excellence in Chiropractic Education (DECE) has uncovered what appear to be major organizational problems within the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE). "While examining the processes and rules CCE uses to accredit and de-accredit chiropractic programs and the legal sources of their authority, DECE was stunned to find that CCE had violated its own rules and procedures as well as those of the states of Wisconsin and Arizona, in which CCE has held or sought corporate status," says Dr. Donald Hirsh, DECE spokesperson. DECE's intensive legal research and analysis has revealed that CCE may have no legitimate corporate status in any state. DECE's lead legal counsel, James S. Turner, alerted CCE of the organization's concerns in a letter to Executive Vice President, Dr. Paul Walker, stating: We believe that the argument can and likely will be made that CCE is operating outside the corporate validity it needs to effectively and authoritatively function as an educational standards setting body. We also believe that the additional argument could and likely will be made to the Department of Education, by others if not us, that the organization that the federal department recognized to accredit chiropractic professional programs, that is, the CCE as originally recognized, is not the body that is functioning under the name Council on Chiropractic Education today. (See Mr. Turner's letter of October 15, 2002 as attached.) "This apparent lack of corporate standing brings into question the very legitimacy of the CCE and places the organization and its trustees in an awkward and legally precarious position," says Mr. Turner. In addition to the uncertain legal status, CCE has taken steps to fundamentally change the mission of the CCE from accrediting programs that educate doctors of chiropractic to accrediting programs that educate "primary care physicians". This dramatic change not only appears to discriminate against those institutions desiring to operate within the traditional definitions and orientations of the chiropractic profession, but has also raised serious legal and operational questions centering on the definition and meaning of the "primary care physician" concept. In many states, use of this term is reserved by law to doctors of medicine and the use of that term in any capacity by the doctor of chiropractic would have considerable legal repercussions. "Some within CCE are, it appears, seeking to engineer fundamental changes in the direction and nature of chiropractic education and practice, quite apart from any mandate from the chiropractic profession and, in too many cases, in stark contrast to what the state laws say chiropractic is," Mr. Turner continued. "Such unilateral changes in the requirements for educational institutions places both chiropractic schools and the students that they are educating in a potential confrontational position with the law. This is bad policy and needs to be corrected." DECE is attempting to develop a meaningful dialogue with CCE decision-makers out of a grave concern for the future of chiropractic education and those institutions that are presently obliged to act according to the dictates of the CCE. "It is just possible that the leaders of the CCE are unaware of the situation they are in and we hope that our efforts will help avoid a situation in which all of the chiropractic educational institutions, as well as the profession at large, are seriously disadvantaged," Mr. Turner further stated. DECE is urging the leadership of the CCE to address their uncertain structure and consider the possible consequences of continuing along a potentially self-destructive path. "Those who stand to lose are not only the students and other members of the Life University community, but the chiropractic profession as a whole," said Dr. Hirsh. "If it is discovered that the demands and penalties CCE has levied against Life are coming from an improperly configured organization, you can imagine the massive backlash CCE will be obliged to deal with, not just in the courts and court of public opinion but with a host of government agencies." Information on DECE is available on the Internet at www.DECE.org . #### October 15, 2002 Dr. Paul D. Walker, PhD. The Council on Chiropractic Education 8049 North 85th Way Scottsdale, AZ 85458-4321 Dear Dr. Walker, Thank you for setting aside your policy of not responding to lawyers. My client and I find your six-page comment on my letters to Drs. Phillips and Brimhall and attorney Pope quite helpful. I suggest that we work toward better communications between our respective groups. My client and I believe that the best approach for improving communications would be for representatives of the two groups to meet in person. We are prepared to meet at any reasonable time and place. Before setting out further details of our concerns, I have a preliminary comment. I intended my letters to CCE leaders to be constructive rather than hostile. My client and I remain interested in addressing the problem of the appearance of a lack of fairness in the activities of CCE. That is why we phrased the heart of our concerns more as a series of tough, important questions than direct accusations. We look forward to your response to this letter, which we hope will address our previous as well as our current questions. DECE and its advisors have reviewed your letter, and those of Drs. Phillips and Brimhall and attorney board member Pope, with great care. We have also obtained and reviewed, going to great lengths and expense, official copies of available relevant documents from the applicable authorities, concerning many aspects of the CCE's organization and activities. Our study is ongoing, and we are basing all questions and concerns on our, we hope, objective reading of original documents. In addition to our previously asked questions, most of which remain unanswered, the documents we have obtained raise serious questions about CCE's corporate status. What we are learning confirms my initial impressions of a lack of clarity in CCE's structure and procedures that seems to create potential dangerous exposure for the organization. We have also reviewed the procedures followed by CCE in its recent reorganization of its corporate structure. It appears from your governing body records, including apparently official minutes, that a major reorganization took place in spite of the fact that the motion authorizing it failed to receive the required two-thirds majority vote. The official records show that despite this failure, CCE's executive leadership proceeded to reorganize. One of the more significant consequences of the reorganization, questions about procedural appropriateness in making these changes notwithstanding, is the fundamental shift in the philosophical direction and decision- making basis of the CCE. This shift, away from the historic parameters and values of chiropractic, accompanied by a major shift in the mission of the CCE, from a body accrediting institutions that educate doctors of chiropractic to one accrediting programs that graduate primary care physicians, appears to fall outside the authority of an accreditation agency. Among other problems, this shift raises serious questions about compliance with state and federal law, including the fact that a number of states have prohibited chiropractors from using the term "primary care physician." On its surface this redefinition seems, not only potentially illegal, at least in some jurisdictions, but also excessively narrow, controlling and anti-competitive, and appears to counterproductively penalize the educational institutions that collectively train the majority of chiropractic doctors for professing the traditional chiropractic orientation. This subject needs serious discussion. The legal issues inherent in CCE's transformation are of enough significance that if they cannot be openly discussed among interested parties and resolved they could easily become the focus of regulators, such as state attorneys general, the US Department of Education, and state and federal anti-trust law enforcement agencies. Significant legal issues are raised when an exclusive standards setting body like CCE affects the educational marketplace by professing a particular philosophical position to the exclusion of competing philosophies. Of less long term importance but far more immediate concern, however, both to you and to us, is CCE's corporate status. We believe that the argument can and likely will be made that CCE is operating outside the corporate validity it needs to effectively and authoritatively function as an educational standards setting body. We also believe that the additional argument could and likely will be made to the Department of Education, by others if not us, that the organization that the federal department recognized to accredit chiropractic professional programs, that is, the CCE as originally recognized, is not the body that is functioning under the name Council on Chiropractic Education today. Given the uncertain corporate status of the CCE, the awkwardly achieved and fundamental shift in CCE's institutional power and profound philosophical bias expressed by these realities, we urge CCE to immediately take the necessary steps to remove CCE/COA, its officers, staff and its board members from legal jeopardy. Immediate, proactive steps by CCE are the best hope to avert serious problems. Specifically, the continued functioning of CCE, including the issuance of accreditation and re-accreditation decisions, indeed even CCE/COA daily operations, could very well be found to be legally improper by the courts. Given this situation, the prudent course would be for CCE to put all its actions on hold until these matters are resolved. These are issues that demand critical attention. It is for the purpose of discussing them that I suggest an urgent meeting of representatives of the CCE/COA and DECE. No body of affected individuals that is outside the feared possibility of CCE retaliation exists, other than DECE. We believe that it is in the best interests of all elements of the chiropractic profession, including the CCE itself, for the CCE/COA to immediately cease and desist from all accreditation activities and return to its organizational status of January 2001. Until CCE/COA corporate status, corporate governance, and philosophical bias issues are resolved to the satisfaction of affected individuals, organizations and relevant regulators, including state and federal anti-trust officials, the US DOE, and federal and state legislators, doubts about CCE legitimacy will remain and conflict will expand. For the welfare of the community these matters need resolution. Regulatory authorities, we are advised, will look favorably on swift voluntary corrective steps and a moratorium on academic actions. Such corrective actions may also mitigate the precarious position in which members of CCE and COA may find themselves with regard to CCE's various contracts and responsibilities, including the organization's directors and officers/acts and omissions insurance, which will likely be challenged and possibly found invalid--an outcome we do not wish on anyone. Taking forthright and prudent steps now will alleviate current problems. The future of chiropractic education itself might well hang in the balance. It is very important for CCE and DECE to move forward with care. It is in the spirit of resolving a very serious set of problems that I suggest a meeting. The potential for lasting harm to the entire system of chiropractic education worsens as each day passes. I look forward to hearing from you and meeting with you and your representatives soon. Once again, I thank you for your willingness to suspend your policy of not responding to lawyers. This action has made it possible to continue this dialogue and lay the groundwork for further steps in resolving these matters. Sincerely, James S. Turner Attorney for DECE