Patient sued by former physician for negative reviews on social media

The 10-year legal battle between a Cleveland Clinic urologist and his former patient came to an end this week. Retired Air Force Colonel David Antoon agreed to pay $100 to settle with his former urologist, Jihad Kaouk, MD. Prior to the settlement, Antoon faced felony charges for sending emails to Kaouk that the urologist found threatening, in retaliation for a procedure that had left Antoon impotent and incontinent. Additionally, Antoon had posted a list on Yelp of all of the surgeries that Kaouk had scheduled at the same time as Antoon’s, even though Antoon had specifically requested that Kaouk be the only one permitted to perform the surgery.

This case demonstrates the legal difficulties associated with posting about medical matters on the internet. While patients have the right to free speech, they do not have the right to posting information that is factually incorrect. In online comments, patients may only offer opinions that do not specifically address factual points. Further complicating this issue is the confidentiality owed by a physician to a patient. While the patient can post facts concerning their health and medical records online, physicians can only respond (or attempt to defend themselves) if patients allow the physicians to break that confidentiality.

Many medical rating sites such as RateMDs and Vitals will remove comments they believe are harmful or threatening to doctors, though sites such as Yelp will only remove reviews that violate the website’s terms of use. Experts agree that it is generally bad practice for physicians to sue patients, as physicians are more likely to lose and may have to pay the patient’s costly legal fees. To avoid any potential legal issues such as these, attorneys recommend that patients bring complaints directly to doctors or medical centers rather than resorting to commenting on the internet.

Source: USA Today