Medical Licensing Loopholes Can Put Patients at Risk

One woman's exhausting quest to protect patients

It’s Jan. 27, and Sherri Moler sounds tired as she begins speaking to the Iowa Board of Medicine. She’s been here before and will be here again, logging on to the Zoom meeting from her computer, saying what she said the last time and the time before that.

Moler is a middle-aged woman with cropped brown hair. She looks like so many Midwestern women do. She’s poised and polite, she wears a pink sweatshirt, and she’s exhausted. And, like so many Midwestern women, she’s stubborn. She later tells me in a phone interview that her kids say, when it comes to their mom, “People don’t know who they’re messing with.”

As the meeting of the Iowa Medical Board begins, the board president opens up for comments from the community. There is only Moler, waiting in her small video chat box.

“Good morning, once again,” she begins. “I’m not sure introductions or a great deal of background information is necessary. I’m Sherri Moler; I was 13 years old when Dr. Lynn Lindaman sexually abused me at the University of Iowa. I have pleaded and begged of you to take action… As we all know, he is still practicing. I have no idea why.”

Moler is at this meeting, as she has been at every monthly public meeting for the past three years because she wants one thing: for the board to change the language on the renewal application for medical professionals to prevent doctors who have had deferred judgments in abuse cases from practicing medicine.

Moler’s statement asking for small changes to prevent abusers from practicing medicine is short and to the point. And, like a Midwesterner, she apologizes twice. She apologizes for being there. Apologizes for her anger. But as she speaks, the board remains impassive. When she is done, the head of the board thanks her. Then they move on with business as usual.

Later, when I reach out to the board with questions for the story, they’ll continue to be impassive. A comms person sends me one email but doesn’t answer my questions or respond to a phone call or follow-up questions. The issue, it’s clear, is going to be treated like so many cases of assault — smothered in silence.

It’s the silence that is the most exhausting for Moler. In 2020, Moler, an Iowa resident, was visiting Des Moines when she saw an internet ad for a medical clinic. The doctor in the ad was the man whom she accused of assaulting her when she was 13. She recalled being shocked and scared; nervous that other girls might be at risk.

That’s when she began telling her story to the Board of Medicine.

In the summer of 1975, Moler was a 13-year-old at a gymnastics camp at the University of Iowa. She had trouble with her back and went to the on-campus clinic for treatment. 

In Moler’s telling, an athletic trainer named Lynn Lindaman assaulted her during her appointment. She ran out of the clinic and reported the assault to an RA, who called campus security. According to a news story in The Daily Iowan, during his first interrogation, Lindaman admitted to having “oral-genital sex” with Moler. But he later denied it, stating he’d been confused. At trial, he said he didn’t remember the extent of his contact with her. The article continues:

“During his testimony, Lindaman said, ‘no force, no assault, no emotional harm’ had been done to the girl. He said he had ‘suffered’ more than she had. When Lindaman said this, the girl left the courtroom crying.”

On Feb. 26, 1976, a jury found Lindaman had committed “lascivious acts with a person under the age of sixteen.” However, the judge gave Lindaman a deferred judgment, which meant that after he served probation, the court sealed public documentation of the case. Deferred judgments are given when an offender has no prior record and the crime isn’t a forcible felony. 

And the charge of “lascivious acts with a person under the age of sixteen” is not a forcible felony.

The public record of the court’s response to the verdict has been expunged in accordance with Iowa law governing deferred judgments.

After working as an athletic trainer, Lindaman became a doctor and has had his Iowa medical license in good standing and is practicing medicine. I reached out to Lindaman for comment via email. He responded by referring me to his lawyer and gave a warning, noting, “the implication of ‘conviction’ or ‘guilty’ may border on libel.” 

I reached out to his lawyer via phone and email. He had not responded by the time this newsletter was published.

Lindaman later went to medical school; when he applied for his medical license he would not have had to disclose his deferred judgment. While the Iowa Medical Board now asks applicants about deferred judgments, that’s a recent change, but its not clear when the change was made.

In an email, Sarah Ekstrand, a media contact for the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services, told me, “The current renewal application asks licensees to disclose any criminal charges since the date of their last renewal, regardless of whether these charges were later dropped or if the case has not yet been fully resolved by the courts.” Ekstrand also claimed that Moler’s proposed changes would “narrow” the scope of background checks, but that doesn’t seem correct given my conversations with Moler about her concerns.

Moler’s concern is that, while would-be physicians are now required to disclose deferred judgments, the rule does not apply retroactively — meaning those who had them in the past may still be practicing.  Moler also notes that the renewal language asks about charges “since the date of the last renewal,” not about any older charges.

Ekstrand didn’t respond to a request for clarification.

Moler’s case sits at the nexus of the impenetrable world of licensing boards and the culture of silence around sexual assault.

A 2019 study published in the Journal of Internal Medicine noted that the true extent of the abuse of patients by physicians is unknown. The Iowa Board of Medicine’s website notes that of the 700 complaints it receives each year, 70 percent of cases are closed without action and 20 percent are closed with a confidential letter of education or warning.

But this might not be because the complaints are without merit. Canadian medical boards find 2.6 times as many instances of abuse than American ones, and the difference, the studies authors note, “likely reflects more frequent detection and disciplining of physicians who commit sexual misconduct in Canada rather than more frequent sexual misconduct by Canadian physicians.” 

Additionally, if an investigation finds that the accusations are valid, that doesn’t mean the doctor’s medical license is revoked. Revocation is a last resort option. A 2016 story by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution quotes, the executive director of the Iowa Medical Board, who states, “Revocation is the nuclear option…There is this notion of a second chance on some things.”

Medical boards often investigate reports of abuse, find them credible, and still allow doctors to practice. And their only consequence is receiving counseling, educational classes, and/or being chaperoned.

For example, the Journal of Internal Medicine study noted that in 2016, a “nationwide investigation of thousands of medical board orders for physicians who were disciplined for sexually abusing patients or other sex-related offenses since 1999 found that more than one-half of these physicians were still licensed to practice. Little information exists on the effectiveness of possible safeguards, such as counseling of sexually abusive physicians, to prevent recidivism and possible harm to future patients.”

In Iowa, where doctors who are disciplined for abusing patients can be required to attend education classes and be shadowed by a chaperone for a probationary period. And there is no legal requirement to notify their patients. The Iowa Medical Board does have a database where people can look doctors up and read about public findings or public discipline. Still, there is no easily findable list of doctors who have been privately disciplined. 

A 2022 analysis of alleged abuse by physicians, explains that cases of abuse are underreported and given the laborious state medical board investigation process, “It would thus appear that numerous alleged infractions never reach the formal hearing stage and thus are not entered into the public record. Even when [state medical boards] do find against a physician licensee, the public notices issued are often vaguely worded.”

The Iowa Board of Medicine says it cannot comment on investigations. Moler says she was told her case was investigated, but she laughs at the term because, she says, she was never even interviewed.

Moler explained that when she reached out to find out why she hadn’t been contacted about her complaint, she was told that a complaint had already been filed and investigated from 1990 to 1994, and that she was listed as the complainant. Moler says she did not file that complaint.

The Iowa Medical Board database lists no findings against Lindaman. 

This isn't the first time the processes of patient protection have been shrouded in secrecy. A 2017 Iowa state ombudsman report on licensing boards is damning. It found “lackadaisical investigation, apathetic board members, poor documentation of deliberations, and questionable outcomes. Even though we exhausted our ability to investigate these cases, it is still inexplicable why some of them were dismissed with no action.”

The report continues: “Is it possible that Iowa’s licensing boards, through their less-than vigorous work, might be failing to protect the public at large from troublesome practitioners?” 

Moler’s case answers that question with an unequivocal yes.

This issue isn’t a new one. Larry Nassar infamously used the medical system and the silence of his victims to keep on practicing medicine — and abusing young girls. In the wake of the story, many states pushed for changes to close loopholes that allow doctors who are found guilty of abuse to continue practicing medicine. But the arcane and opaque governing bodies that oversee patient safety show little inclination to change. Abusers hide in bureaucratic silences. And as the Nassar story has slipped from the headlines, so has the will for reform.

Moler’s story was reported on by the local television station KCCI last year. But she says she’s had a hard time getting any other news outlets interested.

That hasn’t dampened her efforts. Molder sent me an Excel spreadsheet of more than 20 people and organizations she’s contacted about Lindaman. In response, one organization, the U.S. Center for SafeSport, listed Lindaman in its disciplinary database. Moler and her lawyer recently received copies of the court records from the trial and are evaluating their next steps.

Whatever else happens, Moler will be there at the Board of Medicine’s next public meeting, once again begging for change.

---

---

Further Reading:

In 2016 the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published a comprehensive investigation into the issue of doctors and abuse allegations and graded states based on their medical licensing practices.