|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Saturday, May 11, 2002“While working as The New York Times' corporate physician, Dr. Horn said, company executives asked her to let them see patients' medical records even though she didn't have patient permission to share the confidential information. She also claims, in court documents, that the vice president for human resources told her to "misinform employees regarding whether injuries or illnesses they were suffering were work-related so as to curtail the number of workers' compensation claims filed against The Times." When she didn't comply, Dr. Horn said, she was fired.” They don’t even attempt to deny the accusation in their defense. Instead, they concentrate on whether or not the doctor has any right to sue them at all: “The newspaper argued -- and a minority of the court agreed -- that Dr. Horn shouldn't be allowed to bring a lawsuit because there is no right to do so under New York's at-will employment doctrine.” What’s more, judging from the court’s majortiy opinion, the Times argued that patient confidentiality isn’t an integral part of the medical professional code: "We must reject the Times' contention that confidentiality is not part of the professional code that is essential to the survival of the medical profession," the court said. "Indeed, the confidentiality rule that Dr. Horn refused to violate is a primary tenet of the medical profession and one of profound importance to patients and to the public." That's no way for a liberal newspaper to behave, especially one that has a history of championing patient confidentiality, as they do in this editorial on HIV testing. posted by Sydney on 5/11/2002 01:02:00 PM 0 comments 0 Comments: |
|
