Some Texas doctors have begun keeping an online database of patients who have brought malpractice lawsuits in the past. The database's purpose seems to be to allow doctors to assess how "risky" treating a particular patient is.
For months, an obscure Texas company run by doctors has been operating a Web site, DoctorsKnow Us.com, that compiles and posts the names of plaintiffs, their lawyers and expert witnesses in malpractice lawsuits in Texas and beyond, regardless of the merit of the claim.
"You may use the service to assess the risk of offering your services to clients or potential clients," the Web site says. . . .
"They can sue but they can't hide," says the Web site. . . .
The sponsors draw no distinctions among cases
The biggest objection I can see to this database is the bolded sentence: the database doesn't seem to distinguish between pesky, litigation-prone plaintiffs, and genuinely aggrieved patients.
Of course, it's difficult to determine what level of detail is needed in order to ensure that the database "fairly" represents plaintiffs. Some plaintiffs might have a legitimate grievance, but nevertheless lose the suit for legal reasons unrelated to the merits of the case: statute of limitations, lack of personal jurisdiction, exclusion of evidence, etc. Other plaintiffs might win a suit for reasons unrelated to the merits: e.g., a non-appearance by the doctor. And settlements are, of course, big black boxes: does the doctor admit fault, or not? So the unfairness created by the extremely limited description in the database might be difficult to remedy.
There's another issue: what resources do patients have to research whether their doctors have been sued for malpractice? According to this website, 15 states (including Texas) allow potential patients to look up disciplinary actions. This website links to several searchable online databases--most of which charge a fee. Finally, California has a great searchable database that claims to allow people to look up malpractice suits. Unfortunately, I don't know any doctors who have had malpractice suits against them, so I can't vouch for the accuracy of any of these databases. But the existence of the malpractice-doctor databases might make the existence of this malpractice-patient database seem more fair.
Of course, I can see why people would be upset by a malpractice-plaintiff database. The concern is that people would be deterred from bringing lawsuits for fear that they'll be unable to get medical care in the future. On the other hand, the lack of such a database will just mean that litigation-fearing doctors will be ever more cautious about treating all patients--or else they'll mandate so many tests and re-tests and double/triple checks that medical costs skyrocket so that doctors will be shielded from liability.
Comments are welcome. This is a very interesting question, and one with life-and-death implications.