(Music plays) >> Caitlin Bernard sanctioned by the state medical board.

Indiana kids likely to interact with DCS.

Plus, Eric Doden's plan for Indianapolis and more.

From the television studios at WFYI, it's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending the 26th 2023.

>> Indiana Week in Review as possible by the supporters of Indiana public broadcasting stations.

>> This week, Caitlin Bernard described as a good doctor but the head of the Indiana medical licensing board was found to have violated state and federal patient privacy laws.

Bernard received a letter of reprimand and defined for charges related to abortion care she provided last year to a ten-year-old rape and from Ohio.

>> Attorney General spokesperson Kelly Stevenson declared victory for patient privacy.

>> It is not right and the facts presented today made it clear.

>> Bernard and her attorneys didn't speak to reporters after the licensing board's 14 hour long hearing.

But Doctor Tracy Wilkinson, a colleague of Bernard to set to the hearing, said the board's decision sends a message to all physicians.

>> That political persecution could happen to you next.

For providing healthcare to your patients.

>> Bernard was cleared of charges that she failed to report child abuse and is unfit to practice.

She can appeal the board's decision.

>> What does this decision mean for physicians in Indiana?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel, Democrat Ann DeLaney, Republican Chris Mitchem, Kaitlin Lange, senior investigative reporter at state affairs Indiana and Niki Kelly, editor-in-chief of the Indiana capital Chronicle.

I am Indiana Public Broadcasting Statehouse Bureau Chief Brandon Smith, and Delaney what message does this sound?

>> I guess after months of persecution and defaming Doctor Bernard by name.

She was completely cured of the charges that he originally brought but she failed to report and her failure to report put that child in jeopardy by putting her back in the home.

It was unanimous affirmed by the board that he was wrong about that.

But in the course of doing that, and by the way, they talk about a HEPA violation, the child's name and mother's name have never been made public.

And there has never been a charge by the mother that the privacy of the family has been violated.

Point taken that in addition to that, to give Rokita who has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on this and enjoyed all kinds of media attention as a result of his definition -- defamation of Doctor Bernard to give him a fig leaf, which is all this is a fig leaf, they have interpreted it way more broadly.

Way more broadly than I think it was supposed to be interpreted.

The result of that is that any physician talking with any other physician about a client could be in danger of the same kind of persecution that Rokita has done against Doctor Bernard.

They don't want you discussing the fact that ten-year-old get raped and get pregnant and need abortions.

They don't want the discussion, they want to deny it.

Which is what the - Attorney General from Ohio did at the beginning of the case.

They don't want a meaningful discussion about the fact that there draconian laws have a negative health effect on women and girls.

They don't want that discussion.

They want to say their right to life and abortion is wrong under any circumstance and that is Todd Rokita.

He has wasted taxpayer money.

He has jeopardize the ability of physicians to discuss with one another the right treatment for patients because of the broad interpretation that it is a disgrace that he ought to be disciplined by the Supreme Court.

>> I would just note that my daughter Cathleen... >> My daughter Cathleen represents Doctor Bernard.

>> She talked about it being a fig leaf, the part of the decision that sanctioned Doctor Bernard was a fig leaf.

Was this a split decision and that Doctor Bernard gets to continue practicing but Todd Rokita says "Look I want something".

>> I would say a lot of credit needs to go to the board who held a hearing not only because it required 13 hours of attention and different information to process and come up with the decision.

I feel like they did a good job of weeding through a lot of the things that didn't really matter.

At the beginning they were talking about whether a certain tattoos that Doctor Bernard might have is relevant.

Or the name of the doctor that she talked to might be relevant.

I think the good it did Mike did a good job of focusing on when it comes to if she violated privacy.

>> Or child abuse.

The first charge which they threw out unanimously.

>> In the deliberations they talked a long time about what constitutes a HEPA violation.

How much information can you share?

They spent time debating amongst themselves.

They said there is nothing here.

>> I think, maybe to refute something and set about they don't want you talking about - 10-year-olds getting abortions at all.

They were clear that you can use hypothetical situations, you can use your expertise as a physician to go and talk about how this may or may not arms the general population of Indiana but when you go to a newspaper outlet and I think one of the board member said how many ten-year- old pregnant people travel from Ohio?

I think that is the basis... >> More than... >> It was the totality of the information shared that they felt crossed the line.

In terms of what it says to physicians across Indiana, we heard of a couple of colleagues last night that said make them think twice about practicing in Indiana.

But the board also stressed especially the Board President Jon Strobel, stressed that this is a unique case.

We probably won't use this much because I'm not sure will even see a case like this come up again.

How much does that really, how much will that affect the practice of Ederson in Indiana?

>> I think it will still have an impact.

I can help but think about this through a journalism lens that we do interview physicians and other medical experts and like to get specifics when possible.

Everybody knows that helps better tell the story.

I do think that could limit that a little bit but to your point, this was it an unique situation and far more political than any other case for the most part that the board sees.

You can't ignore the politics behind it.

>> It wouldn't have been if Rokita hadn't jumped on this with both feet and hands.

>> To the point, you can't ignore the politics of the start it doesn't happen in a vacuum so when we talk about the impact of physicians in Indiana particularly in this area, in obstetrics, abortion care and reproductive care, we saw, we heard the results of IDU health surveying medical students last year during the abortion ban debate and 80% of them said the fact that Indiana was debating the band was going to have an impact on whether they practiced medicine in Indiana.

Where 1/3 of counties don't have a hospital or pregnancy center already.

To that end, even though she got off with a letter of reprimand and a fine, doesn't make it more difficult for Indiana to attract and retain young talent in the medical field?

>> Obviously yes.

The words will think of when we come to this is a chilling effect.

This case could still be appealed to a judge.

It is still out there but whether it is unique or not it is a precedent.

And if I am a doctor, I am not going to tell anyone anything.

Even during the discussion amongst the board, there were comments from doctors who said, "Hey we talk about our cases all the time in the lounge".

Are we breaking HIP PA?

Or among support themselves when they talk about a case Mac are we identifying people just by talking about the ideas of a case that there is a larger discussion to be had that I do think that maybe the legislator might wait!

Wait into a few parts of the law to clarify specifically who to report to and what counts as a... >> A new national Speaking of child abuse, on children's interactions with child welfare agencies reveals that Indiana kids are at risk of maltreatment investigation, confirmed maltreatment and foster care placement more than most, if not all of their peers around the country.

The reports details were outlined in a recent story by the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

>> About 4/5 Black Indiana children will be part of a maltreatment investigation by DCS during his childhood according to new research.

No other group is at greater risk in the entire country.

The Capitol Chronicle reports Indiana is one of only three states in which there is at least a 50% chance of a maltreatment investigation during childhood for all children.

In the story, the Department of Child Services noted that, in the last five years, the rate of entry into care for Black Hoosier kids decreased by 46%.

The national study also reveals that Indiana children are second-highest for risk of confirmed maltreatment.

Chris Mitchem, how shocking are these numbers?

>> Very shocking and I would say more heartbreaking than anything honestly.

I think if there was a silver bullet that we could use to fix this, obviously we would have done it yesterday.

I think a lot of the solutions being thrown around about putting more resources to DCS, you can have all the agents pay them as much as you want, that is not going to keep children from falling into this predicament in the first place.

I think the same can go for a lot of the welfare programs you can see being proposed to help Will it help?

Maybe.

I think this is way more than a legislature issue.

You have to get to the root of the cause start particularly in the Black community.

When you see 70% of babies around the country who are born into wedlock, that is not a good indicator or start for what is considered a healthy family unit going forward to prevent more of these.

I think it is way more than a legislature, any law or any more resources towards DCS, it is really something local communities have to tackle Weatherby organizations, face leaders to comment improving the stock >> Is that the biggest thing that Roxie back.

Obviously the numbers themselves are stunning.

>> No it's not.

>> Is the biggest problem that it doesn't feel like there's one thing we should be doing?

>> I don't think there's any reason to think Black children in Indiana or in any different situation than many of the sister states that in the fact that we have this many interventions doesn't it seems to me, talk about the health of the family unit, and it talks about whether there is racism in the process in my mind.

Because you seem to be, we seem to be singling out African-American children.

And there are no statistics of which I am aware that somehow the children in this state that are African- American are worse off than they are in Illinois or Ohio.

Yet our numbers are terrible which tells me that part of the problem is with DCS and not simply pay and it is not simply resources.

It is attitude.

That is really frightening thought >> I want to ask one thing also that caught my attention about this, this does go a little bit more to DCS policy because this has been a clear policy from them for a while.

You have all these terrible numbers about maltreatment investigation, confirmed maltreatment and foster care placement and yet, we are among the worst in the country and that, and yet we are in the lower segment of the country four times when we terminate the parent-child relationship.

That has been a DCS policy for a while of reunification if at all... Kind of above all.

Is that a policy that needs to be revisited?

>> Yes they obviously air completely on the side of keeping the family together.

In theory, that is great.

But when you start reading some of these heartbreaking case reports, every year we get a child abuse, neglect, death report and they outline the cases and you're just like "Oh my God how is that kid possibly still in that situation ?"

But I do agree there is a concern about, obviously, we have pockets of poverty in the state.

But I don't think our state is that much different from all the other states to show that huge disparity.

So I do know that DCS pointed out some improvement in recent years.

>> This report goes up to 2019 and there has been a significant drop in the number of Black kids in care in the last three years.

So they are trying to work at it.

>> So this would probably be an issue that lawmakers should maybe, study committees are my favorite in the world, this is an example where we need to dig into Y.

>> I want to ask about that that because over the last decade or so, one of the fiercest advocates for a real, legislature playing a real watchdog role overseeing the -- DCS is now Congresswoman.

Since she left I haven't seen a Republican side that same sort of voice loudly saying we need to be watching out for this.

I am not saying it doesn't happen but certainly not outfront the way Aaron was done is that going to be a problem for when the agency might need a little bit more oversight?

>> Yes, I'm sure someone will step up eventually but I do think it is a lost.

I am interested, the report makes me wonder there is a whole Of argue just taking away children because the parents are in poverty?

How much is due to poverty versus actual neglect?

So I think that is one question I have been looking at the report.

Are we just being too overeager on that?

Again things that a summer study committee could dig into to figure out.

I don't know that there is a voice in the statehouse that has been focused on the issue since she left.

>> To your point I know the word briefly talks about a pilot program about privatizing certain DCS attorneys and whether you like it or not, basically the response from legislators or what do we have to lose?

The state it is now, let's give it a shot.

The summer study committee, it could be brought up next session and would be worth more conversation.

>> Time now for viewer feedback that each week we pose a nonscientific online poll question.

This week's question is does the Indiana Department of Child Services do a good job?

Yes or no.

Last week's question was will Governor Eric Holcomb's endorsement in the gubernatorial race make an impact?

66% say no.

If you would like to take part in the Poco to Debbie FYI.org/IW IR and look for the pole that >> The state would have greater control over downtown Indianapolis under a plan recently proposed by Republican gubernatorial candidate Eric Doden.

>> Doden's plan would give the state sole authority over infrastructure in Mile Square, downtown Indianapolis.

He would also direct the Indiana state police to have a greater presence in "High crime areas" of Marion County.

He would support the creation of a prosecutor review board that could appoint special prosecutors in an effort to "Address Road prosecutors who don't enforce the law" that the last idea was proposed and rejected during the 2023 legislative is session.

Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett has recently announced an outreach initiative to connect with the homeless population in downtown.

State lawmakers recently gave Indianapolis the about T2 tax property owners in Mile Square to pay for improvements, including a low barrier homeless shelter, cleanliness programs and safety initiatives that >> Kaitlin Lange does students play make sense to you?

>> That will be up to the voters but it leaves me with some questions that for instance, state police already have lower numbers in the recruiting classes.

Do they have enough bandwidth to actually step up In the Mile Square?

>> That part of the plan was not just Mile Square it was anywhere in the county that they decided a high crime area.

>> When you have the small recruiting classes do you have enough police officers for that?

Will it make a difference having the state controlled the infrastructure money instead of the city?

- That seems like who is controlling the money?

It doesn't seem like it would make a huge difference on that front.

And then the prosecutor please, lawmakers have tried to pass this bill this year, similar versions in years past and have not succeeded.

So I guess my question for him is how would you actually convince them to get that done this year?

Which I understand, obviously, this is just a blueprint for his vision so there are details that are not entirely worked out yet.

But there are still lots of questions I would have about the plan.

>> I appreciate a candidate that comes up with policy ideas is something to talk about.

But what has been fascinating to me here is that he released the plan a couple of weeks ago but over the last week, has really been harping on this in attacking Mayor Joe Hogsett which leads me to wonder is Eric Doden running for governor or the mayor of Indianapolis?

>> I think I sent that note to a few friends as well.

I get it.

On one hand he is doing what he needs to do to get his name out there.

It is free media.

And it has the added bonus of trying to hurt a Democratic candidate that Republicans want to take the capital city.

It is like a two for right?

I think it could have been paired at least with slightly additional thing of saying how he would help the rest of the state on public safety issues.

Because Indianapolis is not the only city in the state that has some issues like this.

>> Indianapolis and Joe Hogsett has stepped up and has raised the starting pay to bring in more police.

He is talking about what we need to do with gun control in order to deal with crime.

>> Speaking of things I am wondering how he convinces the General assembly on that thought >> You can on the one hand be all against crime on the one hand and then say everybody ought to be issued and AK-47.

It makes absolutely no sense but that is the Republican position.

>> The fact that Joe Hogsett continues to declare that downtown is the safest part of Indianapolis.

It might be the safest part but just because it is the safest part of an area that is overall bad doesn't make it safe.

>> I don't think the city is bad, sorry you may think that.

>> The crime rate on a record number of crimes.

>> That was two months... >> If it continues on the trend it will be another record level at the end of the year.

In Indianapolis.

>> Everywhere that you have guns because the Republicans issue them.

>> I want to ask you, Doden is getting his name out there and as was pointed out he might be dinging a Democrat who is up for reelection this year in the city but does the average Republican primary voter in anywhere that is in Indianapolis or maybe a counties care about a governor's plan for downtown Indianapolis?

>> I think he is trying to make it so they do care.

He keeps referring to downtown Indianapolis as the economic heartbeat.

>> That is where your sports are and it will slowly spread.

- I think a big part of his campaign in general he is he thinks we are abandoning smaller towns around Indiana.

We need to directly invest in those.

>> They have.

They have abandoned them.

>> I want to say one thing, I - do like that he actually has policies...

It had been for more than a year and we haven't heard any policy proposals from any other candidates.

>> You have from Hobson.

>> I agree with that.

Hoosiers could see savings on drug prices under legislation set to take effect this summer.

WFYI's are user reports the billings to provide more transparency and accountability within the drug pricing world.

>> Senate Bill 8 would require pharmacy benefit managers to submit reports every six months to show how much they make from working as a middleman between pharmacies and insurance companies.

It would also require insurers to pass on most of the drug discounts or rebates they receive to consumers.

George Huntley of the diabetes patient advocacy coalition says this is a positive step.

>> A user who is on the exchanges his binder health insurance from the exchanges.

There drug costs will drop and on average cut in half, on average, if they're buying a branded drug and 'The Exchange'.

>> But some drug pricing experts where the language in the bill has been watered down and would allow PBMs and insurers to find ways to work around the system.

>> Nikki, lawmakers have been working on this bill for years, longer than a lot of these healthcare bills.

Did they finally hit the sweet spot?

>> It depends what you consider to be success.

They passed a bill.

That tries to get at pharmacy benefit managers.

There is definitely more transparency in the bill which is never a bad thing.

Do I think they actually have something that is probably not directly cause savings for Hoosiers?

Probably not.

Having said that, I'm not sure there is a way for them to do that aside from draconian sort of government takeovers.

>> To that point, you know it was mentioned in the piece that there are concerns that the bill has been watered down.

This is the same thing we heard about almost every healthcare bills this session that tried to get the idea of cause and cost savings that to that point, are we just not going far enough or is there an -- place where we can go far enough?

>> Keep in mind this was one bill of multiple so at least there are multiple ideas out there.

They are attempting to lower healthcare costs.

Which is probably better than previous years I guess.

That is something we can say that but I think it really is hard when you have so many powerful industries in the sector.

You have it the hospitals, the pharmaceuticals, the healthcare insurance companies.

>> Legislation in general.

>> The process in general, it is hard to break through all that and the vast amount of money these people spend on lobbying to get their points across that at times you don't even know there was doubt cast on the Rand study for example.

We can't agree on what needed to use so it makes it harder to find a good solution that would work.

>> It is not like there are any big drug companies in Indiana (Laughs).

R Hoosiers going to notice or see cost savings because of the bill?

>> Mainly from the Republican side they said this bill is to watered down.

I think a quote that happened on the Senate floor during debate was "This bill will help millions and millions of Hoosiers and it will help thousands and thousands of Hoosiers.

$$TRANSMIT" It is still good policy but about the sweet spot, it might be as good as you can get because it wasn't even a few years ago where they were planning PBMs in general.

>> If it doesn't see the site -- savings that you'd like to see, do we have to get a little harsher?

>> That requires backbone and there isn't an awful lot of that in the legislation.

The other thing that drives this is not just the powerful lobbyists it's the advertising on television.

Ask your doctor if you should have asked or Y or Z.

You be able to dance... >> Followed by 45 seconds of side effects.

>> They don't tell you what it is for.

>> Finally it is that special time of year, the running of the Indianapolis 500 and we ask our panel is to pick a winner for the race.

Chris Mitchem will start with you.

>> The plastic -- fastest car.

>> I want Tony around.

>> I've never gotten this right so I'm going for the storyline Graham Ray Hill all the way.

>> Coming in late to the race after the crash, I like that.

>> I don't follow it at all.

So my guess is going to be for the woman driver in the field.

Have to go with her.

>> I did ask somebody who also doesn't know anything about raising and she said Adam driver.

(Laughs) Alex Scott Dixon for this 1.

Maybe this is the year he finally finishes the race.

That is Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel is Democrat Ann DeLaney, Republican Chris Mitchum, Kaitlin Lange of state affairs Indiana, and Niki Kelly of the Indiana Capital Chronicle.

You can find Indiana Week in Review's podcast and episodes at wfyi.org/iwir on the PBS app, I'm management of Indiana Public Broadcasting.

Join usbecause a lot can happen in an Indiana Week.

(Music plays) >> The opinions expressed are solely those of the panelist.

Indiana Week in Review is