This is in response to the story on Dr. Ted Stokes that was reported in the Sun Journal June 11.

When states began to issue professional licenses, it was done to ensure that the licensee was qualified in his or her chosen profession for the protection of the public. It would appear that the state is now using that as a method to threaten people who are involved in civil suits.

Dr. Stokes’ civil suit in no way affected his ability to practice chiropractic, or created a threat to his patients at any time, and his license should not have been taken. If Dr. Stokes were a neurosurgeon, a master electrician or a master plumber, would the same action have been taken? I doubt it. If so, there needs to be some protection in place to protect licensed individuals from the state.

When all licensing boards were originally set up, each profession was responsible for policing its own licensees. The state came along and said that, for a small fee, it would do it. What we see with Dr. Stokes is the net result of that change.

When boards give up their authority to the state, that is the kind of thing that can be expected. It is using the rights of the boards to issue licenses as a vehicle to threaten those licensees in civil suits that have nothing to do with the ability to practice their chosen profession.

Dr. John D. Reeder, Lewiston