This is interesting, a service suggesting a EULA, similar to one we all see for software, a service for fee to help stop patients from writing bad reviews on the internet, called Medical Justice.
From what I see on the site, the physician gets notified of anything that could constitute a potential lawsuit, but it’s better if you read the information for yourself as there seems to be more than one service available. The item discussed here references the Anti-Defamation Protection from the site. BD
Over 2,000 US doctors have joined a service that supplies them with EULAs for their patients to sign, EULAs that forbid the patients from writing bad reviews of their treatment online:
Segal said such postings say nothing about what should really matter to patients — a doctor's medical skills — and privacy laws and medical ethics prevent leave doctors powerless to do anything it.His company, Medical Justice, is based in Greensboro, N.C. For a fee, it provides doctors with a standardized waiver agreement. Patients who sign agree not to post online comments about the doctor, "his expertise and/or treatment."
"Published comments on Web pages, blogs and/or mass correspondence, however well intended, could severely damage physician's practice," according to suggested wording the company provides.
Segal's company advises doctors to have all patients sign the agreements. If a new patient refuses, the doctor might suggest finding another doctor. Segal said he knows of no cases where longtime patients have been turned away for not signing the waivers.
Doctors are notified when a negative rating appears on a Web site, and, if the author's name is known, physicians can use the signed waivers to get the sites to remove offending opinion.
Doctors force patients to sign gag orders forbidding online reviews - Boing Boing
When we're talking the Internet, where anyone can say and be anyone else, it's not at all unreasonable. Freedoms come with responsibility. On the Internet, though, a person can slander/libel someone, damaging their professional reputation and causing financial damage, without there being any legitimacy to the allegation, nor responsibility for those damaging words. People tend to believe that if there's smoke there's fire, but online, that fire could easily be a disgruntled ex employee, lover, or even a competitor.
ReplyDeleteSome have tried to call this Censorship and claimed it's a 1st Amendment issue. While I don't much care for people editing others responsible words, the 1st Amendment pertains to the government censoring an individual's expression. This isn't the government, and it's not forced upon them. The patient is free to go to another physician who is willing to risk it.
Medical Justice provides invaluable services to healthcare professionals. In a time when our Congress is refusing to enact even basic simple percentage caps on plaintiff's attorneys as an aspect of Tort Reform, the only way to stave off the flow from this gaping wound is for us all to take matters into our own hands. That means doctors taking steps to preclude frivolous lawsuits and other damages. Congress isn't going to fix health care, so we have to do so ourselves.