|
It's happened before and it will happen again. A physician and a patient bump heads. Either the work didn't turn out right or the patient couldn't be satisfied, but the end result is a consumer with a chip on his or her shoulder.
Unhappy patients aren't anything new, but the Internet, with it's assortment of social media and consumer review sites give grudge-holding patients a significant amount of power. A few of those patients recently vented their opinions of Greenbrae, CA, plastic surgeon Kimberly Henry, MD, on consumer rating sites Yelp.com and DoctorScorecard.com. The doctor, in return, sued the patients.
What may have begun as a consumer rant--the sort that goes on every day about restaurants, car dealerships and plumbers-just got serious. According to an article in the Contra Costa Times, Dr. Henry is currently seeking injunctions against 12 reviewers, allegedly former patients, for libel, defamation, invasion of privacy and interference with prospective economic advantage. The doctor is seeking $2 million in damages plus other unspecified costs.
Aside from the obvious reputation problem, Dr. Henry has another problem-most of the reviewers are anonymous. The article states that of 12 individuals noted in the injunctions "only a few have been identified." In fact, due to the nature of anonymous posting, there actually could be less than 12 individuals involved. Dr. Henry's lawyer, Eric Nordskog, claims the negative reviews have been read by "hundreds, perhaps thousands, of consumers and prospective patients."
Nordskog claims to have retrieved some of the defendants' names via a subpoena of DoctorScoreCard.com. In a similar case filed in Texas, DoctorScoreCard.com refused to release the names (or email and IP addresses) and has enlisted the aid of the nonprofit advocacy group Public Citizen. The Website CEO, Earl Thurston, claims he initially gave up the anonymous posters because he "was inexperienced with the law and the way the court system works."
California law generally is on the side of reviewers and against what are called called SLAPPs (strategic lawsuits against public participation).
Web posters generally assume that their anonymous postings will stay anonymous, and many Web sites support that position. Yelp.com claims that reviewers comments are protected, though it warns on its Web site that libel may have legal ramifications to the writer.
Comments about Dr. Henry on DoctorScoreCard.com varied from extremely positive to vicious and included statements such as: "I had brest (sic) augmentation by Dr.Henry and it was the worst mistake of my life!"(Kameei12) and "This doctor's behavior was unprofessional and a disservice to all of the other wonderful, skilled, kind plastic surgeons in the area,"(SFgirl24). The site includes a disclaimer warning: "Always assume that all comments on this site, while potentially helpful, are opinions and not necessarily factual. DoctorScorecard.com does not verify the comments made here to be true."
If Dr. Henry is right, and can prove it, she may be able to successfully shut up the alleged libelers. That's going to be very difficult if those people remain anonymous. Given the viral nature of the Internet, she may be causing herself more trouble by pursuing this and in effect giving the impression that she's vindictive against her patients. We really can't know at this point, but it's worth asking, how can you defend against negative reviews? Should you even bother?
Grant Clauser is editor of Healthy Aging.
Follow us on Facebook.
|