3 ms·
Does anyone know if their are any positive merits to Medical Justice? I always (possibly wrongly) assumed these agreements were an attempt by doctors to "level
by Judson 15y ago
Does anyone know if their are any positive merits to Medical Justice?
I always (possibly wrongly) assumed these agreements were an attempt by doctors to "level the playing field" since they would be unable to counter any negative feedback by a patient due to HIPAA.
Seems like the wrong solution to me, but I can see why doctors think they are protecting themselves from phoney reviews.
- starwed 15y agoI've seen this subject come up before, and someone said that Medical Justice sells themselves pretty hard to medical professionals -- sometime places will sign on without really understanding all the details.
- SomeCallMeTim 15y agoHmm...would the right answer be to get the patients to sign a HIPAA privacy release for purposes of answering any reviews left of their practice? From WikiPedia: "A covered entity may disclose PHI...if the covered entity has obtained authorization from the individual. However, when a covered entity discloses any PHI, it must make a reasonable effort to disclose only the minimum necessary information required to achieve its purpose." Seems doable, and reasonably fair -- if you're going to slam someone in a review, it only makes sense that they should be able to respond in their own defense. In this case the "minimum information necessary" could be something like (I'm making this up!) "My fee for coming in on a weekend day is $2000, and that was the only appt. time available" or "He is misrepresenting the services performed, and his insurance denied coverage" or some such. In this case the dentist may not HAVE a valid excuse of course; just pointing out there MAY be another side to the story that we're prevented from hearing because of HIPAA. Food for thought anyway.