ACLU Supports Position of Doctor Terminated by Packard Community Clinic

ANN ARBOR, MI — The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan has issued an opinion critical of Packard Community Clinic’s policy regarding speech of employees. In a letter to Executive Director Kim Kratz, the ACLU states: “… the policy is extremely broad and poses serious civil liberties implications for the free expression rights of employees.” Catherine Wilkerson, MD, MPH, who had worked at the clinic for over five years, was fired by the clinic in February after she protested the policy as part of a new employment contract. Board President Jim Frenza told the Ann Arbor News in February that Dr. Wilkerson was dismissed because of her refusal to sign the contract. In the opinion of the ACLU that contract should be revised and any employees no longer working at the clinic because of refusing to agree to the former agreement should be “… given the opportunity to return to work upon signing a revised agreement.”

The policy and contract language at issue would have required Dr. Wilkerson to refrain from activities, even outside the workplace, which the clinic’s Medical Director Ray Rion, MD, might disapprove of. According to the ACLU, the policy “…could prevent an [employee] from participating in virtually any political demonstration outside of work that has nothing to do with work.” The letter goes on to say that “…there is no question that if all employers forbade employees from expressing controversial political ideas outside of work, the values of free speech and democracy in this country would be severely undermined.” Dr. Wilkerson had expressed controversial political ideas outside of work, and the letter indicates that her doing so is what prompted the adoption of the policy.

Recalling the McCarthy era, in which people were blackballed for involvement in controversial political activities, ACLU Legal Director Michael Steinberg used the term “repressive” in describing Packard’s speech policy. He points out that “Today, the punishment of these individuals is universally condemned as discrimination based on political association at its worst.” The Committee to Defend Catherine Wilkerson (CDCW) requested a meeting with clinic officials to present petitions from more than 400 patients and supporters to stop the termination proceedings. Clinic officials refused. The CDCW also tried to arrange mediation through the Dispute Resolution Center of Washtenaw County, but Mr. Frenza refused, claiming there were no issues to mediate. Dr. Wilkerson hopes that the ACLU letter will cause clinic officials to reconsider. The CDCW will be holding a rally outside the clinic and delivering petitions on Monday, May 5, at 2 PM.

The Committee to Defend Catherine Wilkerson is supported by the National Lawyers Guild, Detroit & Michigan Chapter; Council on American Islamic Relations, Michigan Chapter; Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality; Huron Valley Greens; Green Party of Michigan; Michigan Emergency Committee Against War & Injustice; Gray Panthers of Huron Valley; Bolivarian Youth (Miami); and, the Broward (FL) AntiWar Coalition. Read other articles by The Committee, or visit The Committee's website.

20 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. evie said on April 23rd, 2008 at 9:48am #

    What specific activity is the doctor forced to refrain from due to the contract?

    Was this contract devised after her 2006 run-in at U of M with police and protestors against Prof. Raymond Tanter a.k.a. Zionist forces?

    Wilkerson was not charged until after she filed a complaint of police brutality, right? What happened with her trial for this in 2007? I know the other 3 people arrested pled guilty and were fined long ago.

    Wilkerson’s former employer depends on donors to operate and offer clinic care to the under served in the community, right? Has Wilkerson filed monetary law suits? Has she found another job?

    Having spent many years as a self-employed person, at times it was necessary to keep my mouth shut or turn the job down – my choice. I didn’t consider it “repression.” I also had the option of turning down a contract because I simply didn’t like the person offering it. Could I be charged with discrimination?

    There’s a difference between being fired and being blackballed. And word of advice – if a person chooses to interfere with cops in a take-down situation – shit happens.

    The ACLU and Wilkerson need to get a real life.

  2. CDCW said on April 23rd, 2008 at 1:21pm #

    > What specific activity is the doctor forced to refrain from due to the
    > contract?

    Virtually anything. Would you sign a contract that said, “Employee agrees to refrain from conduct, both at work and outside of work, which tends to reflect negatively on the reputation and public image of Employer, which may negatively affect the ability of Employer to retain current patients, attract new patients or attract donations, or which may otherwise in the judgment of Employer’s Medical Director reflect poorly upon the public image of Employee or Employer”?

    > Was this contract devised after her 2006 run-in at U of M with police > and protestors against Prof. Raymond Tanter a.k.a. Zionist forces?

    After.

    > Wilkerson was not charged until after she filed a complaint of police
    > brutality, right? What happened with her trial for this in 2007? I
    > know the other 3 people arrested pled guilty and were fined long ago.

    She was acquited by the jury of both charges. Dr. Wilkerson was not involved in the altercation that the three others you mention were involved in. She was later charged for being verbally critical of police and EMT tactics during the arrest of just one of those arrested.

    > Wilkerson’s former employer depends on donors to operate and offer > clinic care to the under served in the community, right? Has
    > Wilkerson filed monetary law suits? Has she found another job?

    Yes, they receive some money from donors.

    > Having spent many years as a self-employed person, at times it was
    > necessary to keep my mouth shut or turn the job down – my choice. I
    > didn’t consider it “repression.” I also had the option of turning down
    > a contract because I simply didn’t like the person offering it. Could I
    > be charged with discrimination?

    Dr. Wilkerson had worked at the clinic for more than five years and they touted the fact that she was an activist doctor on their web site. That is, until she became critical of Israel and Zionism. Thereafter, she was presented with a broad gag clause in a NEW contract. When she asked to negotiate over that clause they refused and moved to terminate her employment.

    > There’s a difference between being fired and being blackballed. And
    > word of advice – if a person chooses to interfere with cops in a
    > take-down situation – shit happens.

    Your “shit happens” approach to civil liberties leaves something to be desired. Some of us prefer not to acquiese in police state tactics and attitudes like yours. BTW, Dr. Wilkerson’s only interference was to speak out against what they were doing after the “take-down”. The cops lied and the jury acquited her.

    > The ACLU and Wilkerson need to get a real life.

    Thanks ever so much for your principled support.

  3. TS Draegeth said on April 23rd, 2008 at 3:27pm #

    Evie, the problem with your vaguely-libertarian “freedom of contract” perspective is that employers and employees have vastly unequal bargaining power, as a direct and indirect result of the way we structure power in our society. There is no fair exchange in our current marketplace, and organized employers with a vastly uneven share of the resources are in a secure position of being able to use market power (i.e. the threat of starvation/homelessness) to crush behavior that challenges their ensconced position.

    Nonetheless, if you are advocating a law of the jungle free from meddlesome interference, ask yourself: if Dr. Wilkerson and several ACLU members went to the clinic and beat the employer to within an inch of his life unless he agreed to give up the restrictive contract, who would you look to to make things fair?

    Is your answer the government? What would be your rationale for bringing in the government to interfere with Dr. Wilkerson’s freedom to negotiate with her employer in any way she wishes?

    If you call foul because you think physical behavior should be regulated, but not commercial behavior, then what would you do if Dr. Wilkerson was not hired, but came into the clinic anyway and practiced medicine, keeping her profits to herself?

    Is your answer to call in the police to physically remove Dr. Wilkerson from the facilities?

    Oops. I guess it all comes down to physical, doesn’t it?

    This is why the libertarian fantasy does not work. It relies upon artificial divides between market-acceptable and market-unacceptable behavior. E.g., the libertarian fantasy is really only an expression of capitalism, which is to say, an expression of avarice and antilife.

  4. evie said on April 23rd, 2008 at 3:36pm #

    Previously I have read Wilkerson’s shoulder was injured and she was manhandled by the police – was that rumor, not fact?

    Wilkerson made a poor choice to inject herself in a situation that did not require her help. Verbally interfering with the police can land a person in jail, ask anyone here in the ‘hood.

    Cops lied – that’s a new one.

    The doctor is free to find another clinic or set up private practice – or sue which she must be doing as that was one question unaswered above.

    Many, many employers have employees sign a code of conduct agreement. The doctor is demanding an employer adapt to suit her wishes – a million Wal-mart workers should be so lucky.

    It has nothing to do with my being acquiescent to “police state tactics” and everything to do with the ACLU as just another noisy money sucking foundation and/or political lobby, with little discretion.

  5. evie said on April 23rd, 2008 at 4:51pm #

    TS,
    The Libertarians wouldn’t have me as I’m too heavy-handed on taxing and regulating big business.

  6. CDCW said on April 23rd, 2008 at 9:04pm #

    > Previously I have read Wilkerson’s shoulder was injured and she was > manhandled by the police – was that rumor, not fact?

    That was fact.

    > Wilkerson made a poor choice to inject herself in a situation that did > not require her help. Verbally interfering with the police can land a
    > person in jail, ask anyone here in the ‘hood.

    Dr. Wilkerson verbally intervened in a potentially life-threatening situation and may have saved someone’s life or prevented a worse injury. Medical records disclosed at trial revealed that the man she intervened on behalf of suffered a brain injury at the hands of police. There was nothing poor about her choice. It was the police and prosecutors who made the bad choices and they ought to face consequences for that. I don’t doubt for a minute that “Verbally interfering with the police can land” you in jail but that doesn’t make it right and that’s no excuse to disparage someone who intervenes on another person’s behalf.

    > Cops lied – that’s a new one.

    > The doctor is free to find another clinic or set up private practice – or
    > sue which she must be doing as that was one question unaswered
    > above.

    What planet are you living on? It cost tens of thousands of dollars for attorneys to deal with the trumped-up criminal charges. And it costs tens of thousands to set up a private practice. There’s no law in Michigan that prevents an employer from firing you over your political beliefs but again that doesn’t make it right.

    > Many, many employers have employees sign a code of conduct
    > agreement. The doctor is demanding an employer adapt to suit her
    > wishes – a million Wal-mart workers should be so lucky.

    It seems that facts aren’t a real impediment to you. How many employers have a provision that gives them absolute discretion over what their employees do outside of work? That’s the issue here. Does Wal-mart? I think it would be fantastic if a million Wal-mart employees and a million of their supporters would stand up for themselves and luck has absolutely nothing to do with it.

    > It has nothing to do with my being acquiescent to “police state
    > tactics” and everything to do with the ACLU as just another noisy
    > money sucking foundation and/or political lobby, with little
    > discretion.

    You could have fooled me with your “shit happens” attitude.

  7. mary said on April 24th, 2008 at 12:43am #

    I live in the UK and heard about the Zionist persecution of Dr Wilkerson from a friend who is a Doctor here. Many people here have signed the petition and have written to the clinic’s Board in her support. We have read all the details of the case and know the facts of the events preceding her dismissal, unlike Evie above who can only shout her prejudices. Please read the comments on the petition to see how Dr Wilkerson’s patients in Ann Arbor value her and sign up if you espouse free speech and don’t like seeing an individual bullied. There has been a great injustice here.

    http://defendwilkerson.org/

  8. evie said on April 24th, 2008 at 4:39am #

    Heehee – the “left” solution to injustice. $ue and sign a petition – it’s been working so well in America – onward to victory.

  9. TS Draegeth said on April 24th, 2008 at 10:13am #

    Snide commentary may be part of the reason that nonviolent methods of change have not had a greater effect.

  10. evie said on April 24th, 2008 at 11:41am #

    When has there ever been major social change w/o violence? Independence for the colonies? Freeing slaves? The labor movement of the early 1900s? The 1960’s? Civil Rights?

    But I understand the reluctance to physically make a stand or even alter our behavior to be more independent from government – it’s so much more fun and safer to just keyboard “the powers that be” into submission. Besides, the following generation seems to lose many of the gains made by the previous.

  11. TS Draegeth said on April 25th, 2008 at 9:02am #

    Perhaps it is because change has only been accomplished that way in the past that we are still mired in such ways.

    It is possible that, someday, the greater part of humanity might discover this to be the best way without being forced into it (which would be intrinsically impossible).

    Maybe it is a slim hope. Nonetheless, I don’t believe it deserves mockery. Do we want a world where, instead of suing and signing petitions, we resort to violence? That is not among my fondest dreams.

    Violence certainly is easy to choose, and gives a temporary high if you win. It is also easy to laugh at those who try to avoid it.

    I note an irony in your behavior. You decry the negative elements of the black community for the violent, antisocial behavior in the ghettos–and you mock those who choose a more peaceful, socially acceptable way. Does cake taste better when eaten double?

    Turn your intelligence to a better end. Don’t kick the downtrodden for kicking others; don’t use your keyboard to petition against those who do nothing but petition and use their keyboards. Your fears of the results of inaction are causing you to mirror the behavior you loathe. Leave the cycle behind.

  12. evie said on April 25th, 2008 at 9:57am #

    No where have I advocated violence. I advocate action. Action can be as simple as curtailing our individual consumption, boycotting that which we disagree with, tax protestation, etc. etc. etc.

    You need to come off your high horse TS.

  13. mary said on April 25th, 2008 at 10:48am #

    This is an extract from a report describing how Dr Wilkerson found herself involved in the first place. I hope that this is not the scenario, the wading in of police against non-violent protesters, that we are supposed to espouse? She has had to endure a trial, acquittal, followed by oppressive action from the Clinic’s Board and then dismissal. Better to use the pen or keyboard I say

    “During a protest against the war on Iraq and threats of war on Iran, University of Michigan police brutalized and arrested three activists. Police tactics included the use of pressure point control tactics. PPCT is a pain compliance tactic that essentially uses painful pressure and manipulation of the body in order to force the victim to comply.

    After brutalizing one protester and threatening him with pepper spray directly in the face, the police then pinned him to the ground in a manner that can result in suffocation. As the man groaned in agony, the officer used his knee and his substantial physical bulk to crush the protester’s chest, face down against the floor. Between desperate gasps, the man told officers that he could not breathe, and then fell unconscious.

    Dr. Wilkerson identified herself as a physician and demanded access to the man in order to examine him and determine if his life was in danger. After much resistance from the police, Dr. Wilkerson was allowed to examine the man and determined that he was still alive. As this was occurring, an ambulance with paramedics, the fire department and the Ann Arbor police arrived on the scene.

    Dr. Wilkerson was forcibly kept aside. One of the medics then held a succession of three ammonia inhalants directly under the patient’s nose, culminating with cupping his hands over the man’s nose while he forced him to inhale the third capsule of the noxious gas. This caused the man to retch and nearly vomit as the medic taunted him, “You don’t like that, do you?”

    Dr. Wilkerson was outraged by the punitive and dangerous actions of the police and medics. She told the medics, “What you are doing has no efficacy and is punitive, and you know it.”

    For speaking out, Dr. Wilkerson too was brutalized by the police.

    Police grabbed her from behind, wrenched her arms behind her, then slammed her against a wall and held her there as she begged him to release his painful grip. The officer then detained her against her will for a protracted period of time, forcing her to stand in a hallway despite her continued extreme shoulder pain.

    Dr. Wilkerson was not arrested at this time, however, as she did not break any laws and was simply attempting to fulfill her ethical obligations as a physician.

    Dr. Wilkerson later registered a complaint of police brutality at City Hall. One week after filing her complaint, she was shocked to find a letter in the mail from the county prosecutor informing her that she was being charged with attempted assaulting/resisting/obstructing a police officer and attempted assaulting/resisting/obstructing a paramedic.

    The charges are a blatant example of police retaliation against a respected doctor and community activist for complaining about police misconduct.

    Dr. Wilkerson faces jail time and hefty fines if she is convicted. She has refused to take the prosecutor’s plea deal because she has done nothing wrong. In fact, her intervention in the police riot prevented possible grave injuries for those attacked by the cops. ”

    http://www.care2.com/news/member/550175964/544212

  14. TS Draegeth said on April 25th, 2008 at 11:48am #

    Evie: I’m sorry; I must have gotten confused when I read your previous response that there had never been social change without violence, and that your opponents were afraid to physically resist.

    So, if there has never been social change without violence, why do you advocate boycotting? I must be missing something.

  15. evie said on April 25th, 2008 at 11:58am #

    Obviously some people know nothing about genuine “politcial repression.”

    Your link is old news – Wilkerson has been acquitted.

    The clinic offered Wilkerson a severance agreement and a letter of recommendation related to her clinical skills. Wilkerson said she wants a contract, not a severance agreement.

    None of Wilkerson’s fellow physicians or employees at the clinic have joined her crusade, have they? How many other Packard employees were fired for refusing to sign the agreement?

    The lady embarassed herself personally and professionally and made a mountain out of a mole hill. After a settlement check arrives from the clinic her repression will go away.

    BTW, one cannot even sign the Wilkerson Defense petition w/o first making a paypal donation to iPetitions – perhaps you have a free petition somewhere else? Also the link defendwilkerson.org is not loading and emails are bouncing back from the only addy I found at gro.nosrekliwdnefednull@cwd.

    Last but not least, while I have absolutely nothing against Ho Chi Minh, I would not call him “a hero” as Ms W. does on her myspace page – but then I’m not one to join into the “cult of personality” as some seem to these days.

  16. evie said on April 25th, 2008 at 12:19pm #

    TS,
    No way would I want to return to the days of labor riots, civil rights riots, or any of the violence our forefathers engaged in – although basically the result of self-defense. But historically major change has always been accompanied by State violence.

    As I’ve stated elsewhere – hit them in their wallets. That to me is “physical.” Can you leave your car parked for a year and not buy gas? Can you avoid Walmart for a year? Can you disconnect cable TV, the State’s propaganda and porno tube into your mind? Can you refuse to pay a portion of taxes that goes to the war machine and risk physically going to jail? Boycott BigMacs and anything made in Chinese sweatshops?

    Most complain but they cannot physically do w/o the “luxuries” provided to them by the machine, the “American way of life.”

    Progressives/dissidents what do they call for or stand for? Complaining about the poverty in third world countries – all while drinking a Starbucks whose policies have devastated Central American coffee growers. Or they call for what a “no buy gas Friday” – I haven’t even seen any of those anymore.

    Whine, whine, whine and blather over every hyped up headline – sign a petition – oh and grab me up another latte hon, should we buy the stainless steel expresso maker or the white one?

  17. TS Draegeth said on April 25th, 2008 at 2:46pm #

    I don’t see being forced out of your job as “making a mountain out of a molehill.” It’s probably easier for a doctor, but that doesn’t mean we should tolerate it. Money has the power to crush what remains of free speech, if we remove the last couple of hurdles attempting to restrain it.

    I share your lack of appreciation for consumerism and ignorance, however, I do not feel that the presence of such things should be your defense against mistreating Dr. W. Moreover, it sounds like she was “doing something” by resisting the police and challenging her employer. If you want action of some kind, what’s wrong with that?

    I’m disappointed by how lightly you are willing to attack this person.

  18. CDCW said on April 25th, 2008 at 3:22pm #

    > Your link is old news – Wilkerson has been acquitted.

    Yeah, and three weeks later she was asked to sign a contract that would have restricted her speech outside of work.

    > The clinic offered Wilkerson a severance agreement and a letter of
    > recommendation related to her clinical skills. Wilkerson said she
    > wants a contract, not a severance agreement.

    The severance agreement, like the contract, is available on defendwilkerson.org and it has an expansive gag clause and blanket waiver of liability. Dr. Wilkerson wanted to stay at Packard and continue to treat the patients she treated for up to five years. She didn’t just take the money and run. She courageously stood up against a politically motivated restriction of her ability to continue to speak out against Zionism and for human rights for Palestinians. As she says in her February statement, “No one should have to forfeit her constitutional right to freedom of expression to keep a job. ” You, apparently, think non-profit, take-exempt organizations, or any entity for that matter, ought to have a right to restrict the lawful political activities of employees outside of work. Thankfully, lots of folks disagree with you.

    > None of Wilkerson’s fellow physicians or employees at the clinic have
    > joined her crusade, have they? How many other Packard employees > were fired for refusing to sign the agreement?

    You never let your ignorance get in your way do you, Evie? Two other clinical staff members resigned as a result of her firing . This was reported in the Ann Arbor News and on the defendwilkerson.org site.

    > The lady embarassed herself personally and professionally and made
    > a mountain out of a mole hill. After a settlement check arrives from
    > the clinic her repression will go away.

    She already turned down one settlement check.

    > BTW, one cannot even sign the Wilkerson Defense petition w/o first
    > making a paypal donation to iPetitions – perhaps you have a free
    > petition somewhere else?

    Like I said, you never let your ignorance get in your way do you, Evie? From the outset, the petition has always said, “You do NOT have to make a donation to sign this petition and you cannot donate to the defense committee through this web site. ” The petition at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/keepwilkerson/ is absolutely free.

    > Last but not least, while I have absolutely nothing against Ho Chi
    > Minh, I would not call him “a hero” as Ms W. does on her myspace
    > page – but then I’m not one to join into the “cult of personality” as
    > some seem to these days.

    It’s funny, Evie, you are parroting what the prosecutor said. She thought the reference to Ho Chi Minh was relevant, too. Birds of a feather, I suppose. Any way, calling Ho Chi Minh a “hero” hardly qualifies as a “cult of personality”. Interested folks can look at what she said at: http://tinyurl.com/6727dd

  19. mary said on April 26th, 2008 at 3:10am #

    I signed the petition along with many of my friends here in the UK and I didn’t donate via Paypal. What ever is the matter with you Evie?

    This has just arrived:

    Please Contact Muzzlewatch & the Committee for the Open Discussion of Zionism

    Both Muzzlewatch and the Committee for the Open Discussion of Zionism (CODZ) claim to be concerned with exposing and stopping Zionist efforts to squelch criticism of Israel and Zionism. Yet, more than two months after Catherine Wilkerson, MD, was fired for criticizing Israel and Zionism and for resisting a political gag clause in a proposed employment contract neither Muzzlewatch nor CODZ has had a word to say about it. This despite repeated requests and the fact that her criminal trial and acquittal on trumped-up charges stemming from a protest at an earlier Zionist event was covered in both the mainstream and alternative media. The controversy over Dr. Wilkerson’s firing was also covered in the mainstream media and the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan has now weighed-in, comparing the gag clause to McCarthy-era tactics and linking it to the ‘controversial speech of … Catherine Wilkerson, about Israel and Palestine.’ The Committee to Defend Catherine Wilkerson is asking supporters of free speech, Palestinian human rights, and Dr. Wilkerson to write to both Muzzlewatch and CODZ to ask them to alert their readers to the Zionist attack on Dr. Wilkerson and the campaign to have her rehired, including our online petition. Send your e-mails to tips-at-muzzlewatch .com and gro.zdocnull@ofni. You can also write to CODZ at: CODZ, Church Street Station, PO Box 374, New York, New York 10008-0374.

    It is NO CRIME to protest against warmongers. It is NO CRIME to complain about police brutality. It is NO CRIME to complain about dangerous medical malpractice. Dr. Catherine Wilkerson will fight back. Will you stand with her?

  20. evie said on April 26th, 2008 at 4:50am #

    I dislike exaggeration. There’s a lot of that going around these days.