San Diego's Beloved OBGYN Dr. Robert Biter Lost Scripps Encinitas Privileges

Dr. Robert Biter lost hospital privileges at Scripps Encinitas effective Friday May 7, 5:00PM, for no good reason.  He is one of San Diego's most beloved OBGYN's and he is dedicated to allowing birth to happen naturally.  He honors and respects his patients and is now offering to attend his patients as an unpaid doula at Sharp Mary Birch so that he can provide his patients with the support they need, until this gets resolved.

Come and show your support for Dr. Biter tomorrow (MOTHER'S Day) by attending a peaceful protest in front of Scripps Encinitas.  

What better way to celebrate Mother's Day than to support a mother's right to choose her own doctor, to choose the kind of birth she wants & to be supported by a doctor that truly cares & goes the extra mile for his patients.

Thanks so much for your support!  

Scripps Encinitas: 354 Santa Fe Drive, Encinitas, CA 92024 


Wear Green!

Bring Signs!

(and a lunch, snacks, water, etc.)

Babies and kids welcome.


Views: 1035

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This same hospital stopped allowing midwives to deliver there in January. This just adds to the idea that birthing options are being further restricted from a once "go to" hospitals for natural births or mothers who wanted the option for a natural birth.
This is happening all over the country. Unfortunately, we don't realize this fact until it happens in our own community. I live in Wilmington NC. Last July we lost two of the three CNM's who were practicing in our town. We protested and formed a grassroots organization (Where's My Midwife?) and we were successful in having our hospital change it's policy requiring a supervising physician to be on site while a CNM is with a laboring woman. We are now focused on educating the public and advocating for better care. We believe that if we join forces across the country, we can demand change! I realize that this happened to a doctor in your town, but I believe the situation is identical. Doctor or midwife - if they are practicing in a way that threatens the machine, the machine will find a way to kick them out.
Check out
Thanks for sharing, Maria! I think someone contacted you guys already, to find out how you got the midwives reinstated....
omg, how can you even think that you have enough information to post comments like this??! Peer review is a serious committee where busy physicians volunteer their time and energy for one purpose: to insure patient safety. This is not a political committee or a financial committee. Trust me, the only thing these physicians got out of this decision was to lay their heads down at night knowing they made a decision that would protect patients and possibly save a life. If it has gotten to this point then Dr Biter has missed or ignored multiple opportunities and warnings to remedy complaints about him regarding patient safety. This committe only asks that any physician or midwife adhere to the medical, ethical and moral codes that any community deserves and those set by hospital bylaws and organizations such as the American College of OB/Gyn. Be confident that to get to this point, lives have been put at risk and standards of care not met. This whole "natural birth and midwifery" offense is a smoke screen. Scripps decision has nothing to do with the sound philosophy, art and science of birthing babies as naturally as we can, but more likely with patient safety issues that have less to do about epidurals and more to do about outcomes of this doctor. Please keep your facts straight and if you don't know the facts, be careful what you defend.
This committe only asks that any physician or midwife adhere to the medical, ethical and moral codes that any community deserves and those set by hospital bylaws and organizations such as the American College of OB/Gyn.

What if these medical, ethical, and moral codes, violate the rights of the patient? For example, you have a baby who is foot long breech, and want to have a vaginal delivery, you also have the good graces of finding an OB who can actually do a vaginal breech delivery. However, hospital policy dictates that you must under go a cesarean. The doctor goes ahead and preforms the delivery, because YOU decided against an elective procedure. This is the kind of situation that got our local OB a peer review. It wasn't about solid morals and ethics, it was about a hospital covering it's behind. To be fair, I do understand that this is necessary, but we also have to be honest with ourselves and acknowledge that a patient's rights must be taken away sometimes, for a doctor or midwife to adhere to hospital policy. What's moral and ethical about that?
Chances are the physicians on the committee , or at least some of them, also got to have a greater pool from which to draw their clients--I meant patients, since competition has been eliminated.

Ever heard of "standards of care?" It means that doctors are supposed to do what other doctors would do in the same situation--even if that is not what scientific, evidence based research suggests is the best course of action. And since OB's are the specialty that relies the least on evidence based medicine chances are much of what other doctors are doing is NOT the best course of treatment.

Take VBAC for example. if all the doctors in the community enforce a no-VBAC policy and one comes in that allows them he opens himself up for litigation and pressure from the other physicians b/c he is going against the "standard of care" in that community--even though all research indicates that VBAC is a safer option for most women than a ERCS.

Another example. This one came from Dr. Marsden Wagner, former head of Women and Children's Health Services at the WHO. Lets say you cut your finger and you live in a community where the standard of care says that the treatment for that is amputation. A doctor decides instead to go against standards of care and give you stitches instead (obviously the better medical practice and treatment). He is now more likely to be held for malpractice than a doctor that amputated unnecessarily--because he violated the community's standard of care.

The peer review process and standards of care foundation in medicine is only as good as the practices of the doctors that make it up. It doesn't matter if what they do isn't based on scientific evidence as long as they all do it it is protected and acceptable medical practice. That's tantamount to letting "the fox guard the hen house." I would rather have what my doctor chooses to do based on what scientific, evidence based research suggests is the best treatment. I DO NOT want my medical decisions based on peer pressure and the need for a doctor to do it because "that's what everyone else is doing."

You said ..."patient safety issues that have less to do about epidurals and more to do about outcomes of this doctor." Ever heard of Informed Consent? Do you realize that as patients, we are supposed to have complete autonomy when it comes to medical decisions? Politics and policy force us into procedures we don't want or need then spout about how "safe" these policies make us and the good outcomes of this doctor. Personally, I would rather have a doctor that puts my rights first and his "record" second. Since he took an oath to do just that.



Follow My Best Birth on Twitter or join us on Facebook.


© 2016   Created by MyBestBirth Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service