All I wanted was a phone call from Wellspan so they can address my issue in-house. They can’t seem to even get that right, so let’s get the State of Pennsylvania involved. This letter will go out with today’s mail. I’m crafting Dr Aaron Goerger’s letter now too given his pre-judgement as well.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Department of State
Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs
State Board of Medicine
P.O. Box 2649
Harrisburg, PA 17105-2649
Subject: Formal Complaint Regarding Professional and Ethical Misconduct by Dr. Muhammad S. Khan, M.D. of Wellspan Philhaven
To the Honorable Members of the State Board of Medicine,
I am writing to submit a formal complaint against Dr. Muhammad S. Khan, M.D., for conduct that I believe constitutes serious violations of professional ethics, medical standards, and patient rights under Pennsylvania law.
On September 8th, 2025, Dr. Khan presented a petition recommending up to twenty (20) additional days of involuntary psychiatric confinement (“rehabilitation”) pursuant to the Mental Health Procedures Act (MHPA), 50 P.S. §7101 et seq. Evidence in my possession (attached) clearly shows that Dr. Khan completed this petition prior to conducting any meaningful evaluation or assessment, as his nurse already had this paperwork filled out, thereby prejudging the outcome and failing to provide an independent, clinically grounded determination as required under the Act.
This preemptive action violated both the spirit and the letter of the MHPA, which mandates that a physician perform an individualized examination before recommending or approving involuntary treatment. Specifically, under 50 P.S. §7302(b), an examining physician must “conduct an examination of the person” and determine that the individual “poses a clear and present danger” before filing or continuing a commitment petition. Filing such a petition before an examination directly contravenes this statutory obligation.
Additionally, during my single meeting with Dr. Khan, he utilized a speech-to-text transcription device (“Dragon”) which recorded our conversation without my knowledge or consent. This device, by design, captures and stores audio for later review to verify or correct dictation errors. Such non-consensual audio recording constitutes a violation of Pennsylvania’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act (18 Pa.C.S. §5701 et seq.), which strictly prohibits the interception or recording of oral communications without the consent of all parties involved. This conduct represents a grave invasion of patient privacy and a direct breach of both legal and ethical standards governing physician-patient confidentiality.
Furthermore, Dr. Khan’s actions appear inconsistent with the professional conduct standards set forth in the Pennsylvania Code, Title 49, Chapter 16, including but not limited to:
• 49 Pa. Code §16.61 – Unprofessional and immoral conduct.
This section prohibits “departures from or failure to conform to the standards of acceptable and prevailing medical practice” and “willful or grossly negligent acts or omissions which would tend to harm the public or any patient.”
• 49 Pa. Code §16.62 – Unprofessional conduct.
This section defines unprofessional conduct as including “engaging in conduct which betrays a lack of good moral character or professional integrity” or “failing to exercise appropriate medical judgment.”
By completing a petition recommending extended involuntary commitment prior to examination, and by recording a patient without consent, Dr. Khan demonstrated bias, lack of due process, disregard for statutory safeguards, and contempt for patient confidentiality and informed consent. The petition alleged that I posed a danger to myself or others—a conclusion not supported by subsequent findings. Upon review, I was released without further treatment or restrictions, confirming the absence of any legitimate medical basis for Dr. Khan’s assessment.
This sequence of events suggests one or more of the following serious issues:
- Prejudgment of patient condition without evaluation.
- False or reckless assertion of risk (“danger to self or others”).
- Procedural violation of the MHPA’s examination requirements.
- Ethical breach of impartiality and clinical objectivity required by the Pennsylvania Code.
- Unauthorized interception and recording of private communications in violation of 18 Pa.C.S. §5703.
Such conduct not only undermines public confidence in the psychiatric commitment process but also endangers the rights and welfare of patients who may be subject to similar treatment.
I respectfully request that the State Board of Medicine initiate a formal investigation into this matter, including a review of Dr. Khan’s petition timing, clinical documentation, use of audio recording devices, and compliance with both the MHPA and the Pennsylvania Code governing medical ethics and professional conduct.
Please confirm receipt of this complaint and inform me of any supporting documentation, witness statements, or medical records that may assist your investigation.
Thank you for your time, attention, and dedication to maintaining the integrity and accountability of the medical profession in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Sincerely,
Room 22