A heated rehearing at the Texas Medical Board on Friday left the long-standing dispute over Houston physician Dr. Mary Talley Bowden’s COVID-era conduct unresolved.
The Board met the morning of December 12 at 9 a.m. CST to consider Bowden’s request to overturn an October public reprimand tied to her 2021 attempt to administer ivermectin to a dying Tarrant County sheriff’s deputy at Texas Health Huguley Hospital.
After about 36 minutes of arguments, the Board unanimously denied the rehearing, allowing the reprimand to stand and clearing the way for a likely court appeal.
The hearing occurred just days after a new Texas law permitting pharmacies to sell ivermectin over the counter took effect, highlighting continued divisions among state officials about COVID-related treatments.
Republican State Sen. Bob Hall used the public comment period to denounce what he called the “unethical, misguided, and damaging behavior of the Texas Medical Board.” Hall said multiple board figures “lied” to the state Senate earlier this year when they allegedly denied that Bowden’s case involved ivermectin.
Bowden’s attorney told the Board it should withdraw the reprimand, arguing that the findings adopted in October did not establish disruptive conduct, that the Board failed to properly notice a hospital-privileges issue in its allegations, and that Bowden relied on a district court order and legal advice when attempting to help a patient during a medical crisis.
“What we’re asking the board to do ultimately is to find that this case does justify the imposition of any discipline against Dr. Bowden,” Bowden’s attorney said.
Board staff, including attorneys Amy Swanholm and Meredith Matsey, argued that the administrative law judges’ findings, which the Board said it was legally required to accept, established that Bowden engaged in disruptive conduct and attempted to bypass credentialing requirements.
They claimed proper notice was given across two informal settlement conferences and said the district court order Bowden relied upon had been stayed the day before her nurse arrived at the hospital. Bowden’s counsel insisted her team did not know about the stay due to a technological error.
Counsel Scott Freshour appeared remotely during the hearing, wearing a face mask similar to those widely used during the COVID-19 period.
Bowden’s counsel indicated that several disputes remained unresolved after the proceeding, including questions about notice, the legal status of the court order at the time, the scope of Bowden’s legal advice, and whether her actions interfered with patient care. Board members and staff emphasized that the Board could not change the administrative law judges’ findings.
After deliberation, Manuel Quinones moved to deny the rehearing request, and Kandace Farmer seconded. All members voted in favor. Bowden appeared virtually but did not speak.
Following the vote, Bowden texted The Dallas Express a statement saying, “Today’s outcome is disappointing but not surprising. I plan on appealing to the state district court and will take it to the Texas Supreme Court if necessary. I appreciate Senator Bob Hall speaking up on my behalf at today’s hearing.”
After the hearing, board spokesman Spencer Miller-Payne responded to emailed questions from The Dallas Express, saying the agency had “no additional comment at the time” on Bowden’s plan to appeal and asserting that she was “entitled to request a rehearing.” He said the board “engaged in a robust discussion” before voting to deny it.
Miller-Payne also claimed that the Board did not believe that the administrative law judges’ findings were in dispute and that the judges had determined the district court order Bowden relied on had been stayed, that hospital staff notified her she lacked privileges, and that “proper notice was given” to her legal team.
