Freedom from SLAPP suits: The right to speak up for patients

The courts need to continue to protect physicians who speak out in order to advocate for patients and to ensure that patient care isn't jeopardized.

Editorial. Aug. 21, 2006.

Imagine a world where physicians were afraid to speak up about issues that could affect a community's health. A world where executives at big companies with lots of money and high-priced lawyers stepped in with a lawsuit when a physician said something that they didn't like, even though the physician spoke out in order to protect patients.

A California infectious disease specialist recently got a glimpse of how that world would look.

It wasn't pretty.

Fortunately, though, a California appellate court stepped in to ensure that doctors have the right to speak up on issues that could negatively impact their patients. It's exactly the freedom of speech that physicians need in their unique role in society where they act as healers, advocates, information providers and citizens who speak out on health care issues.

Future courts need to follow that lead if faced with similarly unfounded lawsuits against physicians speaking out publicly to protect patient care.

The California court in June ruled that the state's anti-SLAPP statute -- formally known as the Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation law -- protected Michael Fitzgibbons, MD, who practices in Santa Ana. The law allows a person who has been sued to ask the court to dismiss the claims unless the person or company that filed the lawsuit can prove there is a probability of proving the claims.

Dr. Fitzgibbons asked the court for relief after he found himself on the receiving end of a lawsuit filed by Integrated Healthcare Holdings Inc., that accused him of defamation, among other things. The allegations arose after the doctor sent an e-mail discussing the financial instability of the company that took over his hospital and three other Orange County hospitals after it defaulted on tens of millions of dollars in loans.