If it ducks like a quack: balancing physician freedom of expression and the public interest

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 advoc...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Appel, Jacob M. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: 2022
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2022, Volume: 48, Issue: 7, Pages: 430-433
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1918652619
003 DE-627
005 20250226153123.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 250226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2021-107256  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1918652619 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1918652619 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Appel, Jacob M.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a If it ducks like a quack: balancing physician freedom of expression and the public interest 
264 1 |c 2022 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a 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. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 48(2022), 7, Seite 430-433  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:48  |g year:2022  |g number:7  |g pages:430-433 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2021-107256  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/48/7/430  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4673487745 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1918652619 
LOK |0 005 20250226153123 
LOK |0 008 250226||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo  |a ixrk 
OAS |a 1  |b inherited from superior work 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw