A socially active friend recently stood trial as a defendant in a medical malpractice case. While he was never called out on any particular dialog, the plaintiff’s attorney apparently gave him a hard time about his social media activity. Then I got to thinking: how would my tweets play before a jury?
The thought is disturbing. An injury attorney doing his job will go to great lengths to discredit a physician defendant. Character manipulation can occur independent of the medical facts. And when it comes to social dialog, any public comment can be used out of context. But the subtle sarcasm that brings a human element to a Twitter thread may appear quite different when a tweet is displayed on its own. Perception trumps reality when an isolated comment is projected before a jury.
I understand that what I publicly share can be maligned. Perhaps my thoughts, wishes, dreams, beliefs, links, and whimsical ideas will at some point be used against me. But I’ll take my chances. Relative to its potential risk, public thinking has brought me opportunity. And the day slip-and-fall attorneys dictate how I interact I suspect I’ll be facing bigger problems than my digital footprint.
Despite the call for free will, it’s situations like these that should serve as a reminder that what happens on Twitter stays on Twitter.
{ 9 comments }
Actually, what happens on Twitter stays on Storify and blogs and Twitter clients and Twitpics of tweets at conferences and screenshots and search caches and….Twitter’s servers – even if they’re deleted.
There’s no stopping social media, and the risks providers take are there.
But one thought: it’s not just the provider who’s taking the risk – there may be risk being born on the patient, and that’s the nuanced part we need to carefully scrutinize.
Yeah, social media done gone throne monkey wrenches – even into places beneath the apparent surface.
A needed post, Bryan. I hope it breeds more discussion.
Thank you, Phil. Yes, patients assume risk that’s often unseen and underestimated. Of course they don’t have the trial bar crosshairs on their foreheads.
Put in medical terms: no procedure is risk-free, but I think the benefits of participating in social media outweigh the risks.
It’s a question of probative vs. prejudicial value. Yeah, a plainiff attorney will try to impugn your character; but any defendant attorney worth his fees will object. But if one’s twitter posts are all about how they booze-bagged the night away before that pesky 5 A.M. surgery…
i have been on as an expert witness in more than one proceeding when opposing counsel has produced a color glossy 3×5 foot blow up of a single quote from an isolated blog post of mine. Judges have let this in…. no sustained objections as yet. When able to explain on re-direct, cross or whatever, the jurists were always satisfied with the explanation… and perhaps more important. When the jury was later polled…. the social nature of being a physician played very well with them.
In the end, it’s all about what you have said. As physician bloggers we need to be prepared to defend or elaborate on anything that we post…
Good point, Howard (above).
“In the end, it’s all about what you have said. As physician bloggers we need to be prepared to defend or elaborate on anything that we post…”
People, in general, need to consider the personal, social, and legal ramifications of what they say on the various social media platforms. Physicians, however, will always be held to an even higher standard. I hope that doesn’t scare too many clinicians off. I also hope that it helps to highlight the power of the medium.
Use it wisely.
Dr. V, I’m a med student and new to Twitter. I’ve chimed in on a couple of discussions like #MDchat and #hcsm. From what I’ve seen so far it seems really unlikely that any of those comments could be of any use to plaintiff lawyers. I mostly see the value of Twitter in its ability to foster these bigger-picture discussions, not personal stuff.
Dr. Kevin Pho promotes a “dual-citizenship approach” for physicians on Facebook, but that doesn’t apply to Twitter because of the simple nature of Twitter. We either twewt publicly, or we can’t participate.
Is there a type or pattern of use that makes one’s tweets more susceptible to use in a lawsuit? My guess is: talking about specific patients or incident, personal comments and venting, etc. Such comments can be made via text messages to colleagues, there’s no need to do it on Twitter. I feel like if we avoid going there on Twitter, we can avoid the pitfall you mentioned.
Am I being too naive?
Jin – The issue is that anything can be taken out of context. I have over 10k tweets. I’m sure you can find one that, depending on the allegation, could potentially put me in a bad light. In the context of Twitter dialog the same post wouldn’t be seen as an issue. I consider myself safe but I understand that what I say could be manipulated. It doesn’t change what I do but it is nonetheless sobering.
I agree it’s an interesting subject worth exploring. I hope I am never judged for something I have tweeted, but then again, I don’t believe I have ever tweeted anything that is inappropriate related to work.
{ 1 trackback }