The concern with licensing remote practitioners who do not have a presence in
the state involves both considerations of quality control and trade restrictions.
Assuming that the practitioner is properly licensed in a remote state, the history
of interstate enforcement of state regulations is not promising: it is very
difficult to get a state agency to act on out-of-state complaints or help with
interstate enforcement actions. As an example, even with massive federal
intervention, it is still difficult to get child support orders enforced on out-of-
state parents. This is understandable because most state agencies are
underfunded and understaffed. They have to direct their primary efforts to the
citizens of their own state. Given that most state medical licensing agencies
are unable to manage the complaints in their own states, it is unrealistic to
assume they can cooperate effectively in the interstate regulation of
telemedicine.
The darker side of telemedicine is already obvious on the Internet—physicians
running Internet sites to sell prescriptions for popular drugs such as Viagra. This
is possible because the drug enforcement laws are really only intended to
manage the distribution of controlled substances, i.e., psychoactive drugs such
as tranquilizers and narcotics. There is little concern with or regulation of the
distribution of other drugs, which has been tacitly endorsed by the federal
regulations allowing the importation and personal use of unapproved
substances and drugs diverted from commercial pharmacy channels. The
proper method of enforcement against these providers is by the licensing
agency in their own state. The pharmacy-licensing agencies in the states
where the prescriptions are filled should also enforce state law prohibitions on
filling prescriptions by out-of- state physicians. The difficulty in these
enforcement actions is that unethical telemedicine providers do not have
physical offices and do not generate the medical records that are at the heart
of most medical enforcement actions.
The most troubling aspect of telemedicine, especially Internet medicine, is that
it is very difficult to determine if the provider is licensed anywhere, or is even
medically trained. When a kid in high school can produce a professional
appearing WWW (World Wide Web) site, all the traditional cues that indicate a
legitimate practitioner disappear. Even insurance coverage is not a good
indicator as more people turn to cash-based medical care, either because of
the referral restrictions in their health plans or to get alternative medicine. In
theory, consumers could call the licensing agency to see if someone with that
name was licensed, but they would have to know the state of licensure and
have some way to verify that the Internet physician was not an impostor. Even
these protections fail for offshore operations.