If They Can't Take It...
From the Wall Street Journal:
"Doctors have long accepted that their patients share opinions about the care they have received, knowing that satisfied patients will refer others while those not so happy with their bedside manner might encourage prospective customers to seek treatment elsewhere. But when William Boothe, an ophthalmologist in Texas, saw that one disgruntled former patient was posting his complaints on the Internet, he launched an aggressive response. He sued for libel and other claims, and earlier this year a state judge ordered the material removed from the Web."
So where will this end? If I write unfavorably about the mechanic who worked on my car, can he sue me? What about the rude clerk at my local convenience store?
It's probably not going to happen, not unless there's a corporate employer who decides to fund the litigation. A car mechanic or a store clerk isn't going to have the personal resources to mount a lawsuit to shut me up. But a doctor will.
I know doctors are used to abject deference but I think we should have the right to criticize the purveyor of any service or good (especially when we're paying for it) and as long as the statements remain in the realm of fact (what really happened) and personal opinion ("I think"), it shouldn't be actionable.
posted by Presley Bennett @ 9/14/2005
3 comments
3 Comments:
I've got to take issue with you on this one Saije.
First of all, as far as I know, the actual content of the disgruntled patient's website wasn't disclosed in the article. We have no way of knowing what exactly was stated. In other words it very well could have been libelous for all we know. Please correct me if I'm wrong since I didn't read the article.
Also, most doctors I know are pretty good people who work their tails off to help others. They don't earn as much money as many people seem to think either.
My wife is a medical professional and every time I visit her at work I come away feeling grateful for all of the people who have chosen to devote their lives to the service of others.
I just thought someone should stick up for the doctor on this one.
I fixed the link. Sorry about that. The article primarily focused on the complaints of a man who was unhappy with his lasik eye surgery.
What interested me about this article is that the complaints were posted on the Internet and that is what apparently bothered the doctor, because of the far wider dissemination of the criticism than would have been true 10 years ago. But that is one of the really positive things about the Internet, more information available to more people. I don't mean to imply that information on the Internet is true, it often isn't, but then each one of us has to decide that for ourselves. If the information isn't there, we won't have that chance.
It also appears that this doctor was advertising his services (apparently not just in specialized medical journals). I think if you're going to enter the marketplace by advertising to the public at large, you lose the right to be regarded as the "selfless healer". Especially in this case where the doctor tried to attract customers by offering a money back guarantee.
Clearly the doctor had a profit motive. Should he be allowed to protect that motive by sueing someone who was unhappy with his services to shut that person up? So some other person who might have found the complaints material to their own decision making won't have access to them? I think that could be dangerous.
The threat of litigation is a powerful deterrent. It's often what keeps people honest, so to speak. But it can also be used to keep someone from speaking the truth not because the person might not ultimately prevail in the litigation but because of the cost to get to that point.
All that being said, there are many competent medical professionals. Your wife sounds like one. I might also add that one thing missing in the article is whether or not the patient didn't sue the doctor for malpractice. If he didn't, it would call the validity of his complaints into question.
All very good points. The doctor in the article might very well have been a sleaze, I just don't have enough information to be able to formulate a valid opinion.
I wasn't really calling your line of reasoning into question. I just wanted to use your post as an opportunity to defend a group of professionals who often get a bad rap.
Post a Comment
<< Home