So - what do we think of this

[thesalmonofdoubt]

http://www.katu.com/news/national/Jury- ... 62431.html


Essentially - from what I can the executive summary of all this is - larger man needs a procedure that requires he is put under anaesthetic, and so, is unconscious. He records the pre-op talk and forgets to turn off his phone so inadvertently records chatter in the OP, plays the tape back when is released and discovers that the team engage in insulting and derogatory banter while he is asleep - and sues, winning $500,000 - 200,000 for malpractice (the reasons for which are not detailed in this article, but this was just on the tellie and, from what I can tell, and this could be completely wrong, they just ticked off that he had haemorrhoids even tho they didn't see any, just cos) ..so I'm guessing the Malpractice suit has something to do with that. The balance of the award is given based on the number of derogatory statements he recorded while under.

So - while I really don't have much of a comment regarding the malpractice side of things, I am uncertain as to whether its reasonable to Sue someone for derogatory comments you make about them when they are recording what you are saying without your consent or knowledge.. I'm not defending it as being a nice or even particularly professional thing to do, but it just doesn't feel materially different from me hanging up the phone on a particularly difficult client and making any number of comments about them with the expectation that its all offline and out of ear shot.
But if I inadvertently failed to hang up and made these sorts of comments about a client and that got reported up, there's a good chance I'd be sacked so - just not sure what to think of all this.

So - comments!

[Pope Bucky]

This says they did more than just talk:

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local ... 62301.html

[thesalmonofdoubt]

I never actually indicated that all they did was talk .. there was a malpractice side to the suit that I'm really not making any commentary on. But a portion of the suit was based on the defamation aspect of the case which I think if comment worthy.

The article you linked to mentioned that one of the people involved touched his penis and made a comment on it having a rash - so, yeah there is that but - given I have never performed a colonoscopy, I have no idea whether adjusting a penis is a normal expectation of the procedure - in either case, if that's part of the malpractice suit then .. that's fine.

I'm more curious as to whether defamation is in order given there was never an expectation that the patient could over hear the conversation because the patient is secretly recording the conversation.

[Dr_Liszt]

Yes it is comment worthy. You are supposed to have an intimate secret keeping relationship with the patient. You are not supposed to mock them with the assistants or staff DURING the procedure.

You do that after work hours.

[thesalmonofdoubt]

Yes it is comment worthy. You are supposed to have an intimate secret keeping relationship with the patient. You are not supposed to mock them with the assistants or staff DURING the procedure

Yeah - well, I'm not saying that they should have bagged out the patient, but rather, is what this women did criminal?.. or better, is it materially different than any other private conversation where disparaging remarks are made.. There is a broad difference between being unkind or outright nasty and something that demands legal reparations and I'm just not feeling this given the man was unconscious and recorded a conversation without the knowledge of consent of the doctors ..

Like I said - I'm really not on either side of this .. for it to have passed in court (at a defamation level, I'm not talking about the malpractice) .. it has to have some legal merit, I just don't know what the rationale is

[Blade Azaezel]

Freedom of speech, biatches!

[Dr_Liszt]

Yes it is comment worthy. You are supposed to have an intimate secret keeping relationship with the patient. You are not supposed to mock them with the assistants or staff DURING the procedure

Yeah - well, I'm not saying that they should have bagged out the patient, but rather, is what this women did criminal?.. or better, is it materially different than any other private conversation where disparaging remarks are made.. There is a broad difference between being unkind or outright nasty and something that demands legal reparations and I'm just not feeling this given the man was unconscious and recorded a conversation without the knowledge of consent of the doctors ..

Like I said - I'm really not on either side of this .. for it to have passed in court (at a defamation level, I'm not talking about the malpractice) .. it has to have some legal merit, I just don't know what the rationale is

Kind of. Like I said she behaved this way during a procedure. It's unprofessional. Mocking the patient with other people around about his condition, is just a violation of the Hippocratic oath, which is unprofessional. Like I said, she was doing this when she was supposed to be taking care of the patient. That's her job.

[BruceSmith78]

Yeah, I think the fact that this was in a professional setting changes things. If he had passed by the doctor's house and she yelled nasty things at him, I don't see a lawsuit, but he went to her office for treatment and was ridiculed for it, by the person from whom he sought treatment. The fact that the doctor thought he couldn't hear her, I don't find terribly relevant.

Imagine a black couple take their kids to Disneyland, and while there they overhear Mickey Mouse calling their kid a dirty little *racial slur*. Do you think they'd have a right to compensation? Do you think it would be a valid defense for Mickey to say, "I didn't think they'd hear me"?

[thesalmonofdoubt]

The fact that the doctor thought he couldn't hear her, I don't find terribly relevant.

Imagine a black couple take their kids to Disneyland, and while there they overhear Mickey Mouse calling their kid a dirty little *racial slur*. Do you think they'd have a right to compensation? Do you think it would be a valid defense for Mickey to say, "I didn't think they'd hear me"?

Well - in the latter case, I guess it would depend on the circumstances, if the guy said a racial slur in a public space in the context of his employment, then obviously whether he thought someone could over hear him or not, he is being negligent in his duties because public spaces always carry that risk. If he said something in the staff canteen and someone walked in and overheard - then I'd feel this would be different.

I'm just not sure which better describes this situation.

What it comes down to, in my mind is that there is a broad difference with regards to causing offense thru negligence and causing offense when there is every expectation that the conversation you are having is private and you take reasonable steps to ensure your conversation is private.. and being recorded without your knowledge or consent seems to over step the bounds of things and employee should compensate for.

This just isn't something that ever crops up in my job given most of the people I work with are conscious.. But, it clearly does happen where someone pisses you off and you bag them out when you think you are having a private conversation - if one of my clients left their phone on recording a conversation that I expected to be private, then .. I'd feel a whole lot less professionally compromised by anything said under that context.

[Islandmur]

What it comes down to, in my mind is that there is a broad difference with regards to causing offense thru negligence and causing offense when there is every expectation that the conversation you are having is private and you take reasonable steps to ensure your conversation is private.. and being recorded without your knowledge or consent seems to over step the bounds of things and employee should compensate for.

This just isn't something that ever crops up in my job given most of the people I work with are conscious.. But, it clearly does happen where someone pisses you off and you bag them out when you think you are having a private conversation - if one of my clients left their phone on recording a conversation that I expected to be private, then .. I'd feel a whole lot less professionally compromised by anything said under that context.

Why is there expectation of privacy in an operating room? I don't think so, aren't a lot of hospitals now recording operations (because of malpractice suits)? And a conversation with a staff isn't private. What if one of the staff later on, told the patient what had happened because they didn't agree with it?

And even if there was expectation of privacy, I'd rather think it would be superseded by the patients right to be treated with respect. Just like someone in a coma, or someone unconscious.

I find it highly disturbing that doctors would mock their patients, i mean can they be performing at their best if they have no respect and such disgust for their patient?

[BruceSmith78]

Well in this case the client was lying right fucking there, in front of them (didn't read the article because fuck that, too much work, I'm going with the context clues in this thread). I'm not terribly sympathetic to any "breach" of privacy here. Not like he was spying on them while they were in another room or on lunch break or something.

I work in a call center, and very often we end a call but the customer is too dumb to know how to hang up their phone. If one of our employees was to assume the call was disconnected and then start talking shit about their customer, they would be held accountable, and I believe rightly so. If the customer happened to hear a representative of our company bad-mouthing them after they failed to properly disconnect, it would be a huge fucking headache for us.

[thesalmonofdoubt]

. What if one of the staff later on, told the patient what had happened because they didn't agree with it?

Good point - I have no idea what would happen legally in this regard but would speak to a general level of conduct expected in the work place.

And even if there was expectation of privacy, I'd rather think it would be superseded by the patients right to be treated with respect. Just like someone in a coma, or someone unconscious.

I find it highly disturbing that doctors would mock their patients, i mean can they be performing at their best if they have no respect and such disgust for their patient?

Also a good point - in terms of the coma patient, and once again, I have no idea how this would be handled legally like, if say a family member left a recording device for a relative that was in a coma and his carers were captured making disparaging remarks .. but you make a good comparison.

For the point of clarification - I'm not on either side of this I'm just attempting to understand the legal basis for the suit

[Dr_Liszt]

The basis is J-man, the doctor wasn't in a canteen talking shit about a patient, she was at an operating room.
Is not like the dude followed her to her house and recorded the conversation where she would have had her privacy violated with reason, he recorded a conversation where a stupid doctor was behaving negligently during her work hours.

[Blade Azaezel]

The reason the guy was rewarded so much was clearly because people felt slighted. I bet the jury couldn't help but think how terrible they'd feel in his situation. Truth is, I wouldn't be at all surprised if doctors talk shit about their patients during surgeries. I would imagine they deride all people for being unhealthy, as the rest of us do. the only problem here is that they were overheard. What you don't know doesn't hurt you. It's a major overreaction and the doctor was unfortunate to be caught out in what would, 99% of the time, be a totally private conversation.

[Dr_Liszt]

I talk shit about my patients after clinic hours. I even made threads making fun of them.

[Dr_Liszt]

Also in my limited experience. I've never seen doctors behave like that even when the patient is on general anesthesia.

All the undoctorly comments are always made afterwards. And is only between people handling the case.