The ethical state of business practice pivots on two things these days: bad press and/or lawsuits. What was once regulated by honor and integrity, these two seemingly more persuasive motivators have enabled us to be made aware of negligence pertaining to our health and welfare such as: the handling of beef in markets, assisted living facilities, police and precinct procedures, and careless doctors still practicing medicine. There is no doubt that investigative journalism perpetuates the public's outcry ball rolling.
Practicing in St Louis as a personal injury lawyer for ten years and after handling a lot of medical malpractice cases, the need for regulation and accountability in our healthcare industry is obvious. Most doctors hate lawyers so much that they will go to great lengths to cover each others backs. Don't get me wrong, most don't lie, but just about all will refuse to cooperate and help a patient who has been harmed by a doctor's negligence.
A major blow has been dealt to the health care consumer regarding accountability of providers. On September 1, in response to a decision by the Obama administration, the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), an agency of the government run Department of Health and Human Services, removed a great source used in identifying oversights by state medical boards. The National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) was used by many sources such as state medical boards, hospitals, journalists, and insurance companies. The information previously accessible from this site listed, in broad descriptors, lax responses toward doctors with multiple malpractice payouts who were either never disciplined by the medical boards or their disciplines included numerous suspensions without a revocation of their medical license. It is important to note that the specific doctor's names are not mentioned in the public use file portion of the NPDB and any information that would name a doctor or facility specifically, must be acquired through other investigative resources.
Neurosurgeon Dr. Robert T. Tenny, of Kansas, complained to HRSA and threatened legal action if the information was not taken off the internet. This complaint made its way to the executive level of the government. A decision was quickly made and access to the site was removed. A letter was also sent to the Kansas City Star reporter who broke the story of Dr. Tenny's countless medical malpractice and wrongful death suites filed against him (all of which the good doctor has lost so far). I am sure the doctor would argue he is a good doc and the legal system is wrong every time.
The HRSA threatened the reporter that he could be liable for $11,000 or more, in fines for violating the federal law's confidentiality provision - though nonesuch violations were actually committed. Journalism and health care advocacy groups also responded quickly to these actions, including these letters to the administration rebuking not only the decision to shut down the public access file but also in response to the threat against the reporter. The journalists are actually baffled that the Obama administration has backtracked on its promise of greater transparency. As described by Charles Ornstein, president of the Advocacy for Health Care Journalists, who stated that the publically available anonymous data has been accessed for years, "nothing else has changed; just their interpretation (of the law)". Interpreting the law to suit oneself or, as in this case, doctors who have repeatedly shown an apathetic attitude toward patient care, or complete incompetence, does nothing but add more restrictions to those that are trying to hold these same people accountable for their actions.
