Article Text
Abstract
Physicians expressing opinions on medical matters that run contrary to the consensus of experts pose a challenge to licensing bodies and regulatory authorities. While the right to express contrarian views feeds a robust marketplace of ideas that is essential for scientific progress, physicians advocating ineffective or dangerous cures, or actively opposing public health measures, pose a grave threat to societal welfare. Increasingly, a distinction has been made between professional speech that occurs during the physician-patient encounter and public speech that transpires beyond the clinical setting, with physicians being afforded wide latitude to voice empirically false claims outside the context of patient care. This paper argues that such a bifurcated model does not sufficiently address the challenges of an age when mass communications and social media allow dissenting physicians to offer misleading medical advice to the general public on a mass scale. Instead, a three-tiered model that distinguishes between citizen speech, physician speech and clinical speech would best serve authorities when regulating physician expression.
- health personnel
- health workforce
- professional misconduct
- regulation
- rights
Data availability statement
There are no data in this work.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
There are no data in this work.
Footnotes
Contributors JMA is the sole author of this paper and is responsible for all of its contents.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Nudging, informed consent and bullshit
- Firearm injuries in children: a missed opportunity for firearm safety education
- Should spreading anti-vaccine misinformation be criminalised?
- Patient and family support in the era of fake e-medicine: food for thought from an international consensus panel
- Value promotion as a goal of medicine
- Too little, too late: social media companies’ failure to tackle vaccine misinformation poses a real threat
- Aid-in-dying laws and the physician's duty to inform
- Health and human rights
- AMA data operation makes millions, even monitors non-members
- Conflicting duties and restitution of the trusting relationship