Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Licensure Reinstatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board declines to recommend reinstatement for physician citing decade-long absence and missing documentation
Summary
The Department of Public Health board voted not to recommend reinstatement of Dr. Topp’s physician license, citing a 10-year absence from clinical practice and insufficient documentation about current clinical plans; one member recused.
Get email alerts on the Licensure Reinstatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Department of Public Health's practitioner licensing board voted not to recommend reinstatement of Dr. Topp's Connecticut physician license after members said the application lacked sufficient recent clinical information.
Celeste Dowdell of DPH’s practitioner licensing and investigation section presented the application and told the board, "Doctor Topp meets all the requirements for reinstatement, except she's been out of active practice since 2016." Members repeatedly asked for a clearer explanation of why Dr. Topp had been away from clinical work and what clinical activities she plans to resume if licensed.
Board members noted that the applicant had not supplied a requested explanatory letter or updated documentation. Attorney Barbara Calderon told the board that, based on public records she reviewed, the applicant had spent time living in Africa and now owns a luxury travel service; Calderon said she had not seen documentation indicating recent clinical education or training that would support resuming practice after a decade away.
After discussion, a motion to recommend approval of the reinstatement application was made and seconded; the roll-call vote resulted in a decision not to recommend reinstatement. The chair summarized: the board does not have enough information to recommend reinstatement at this time, and board staff were asked to communicate the board’s concerns and request the missing documentation from the applicant. Dr. Katz recused from discussion and voting on this matter, as noted in the record.
The board did not set a date for further consideration; staff were directed to inform the applicant of the specific information the board expects to receive if she seeks reconsideration.

