• VB search
User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 03-06-2009, 12:55 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
The "gag contract" Wall of Shame

These are the docs we know of that make prospective patients sign "gag contracts" before they are accepted as patients. If anyone has additions to this list, please add them to this thread and I will update this first post with their names.
More info on this topic here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34794632...h-health_care/
and here:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...=Health&s_name

Update - for more on a related story, please see "Medical Justice planting glowing reviews on RateMDs.com":
http://www.ratemds.com/social/?q=node/49926

The Wall of Shame:

Dr. David L. Abramson
Englewood, NJ
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/3751

Dr. Kenneth Cirka
PHILADELPHIA, PA
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/390391

Dr. Larry Fishman
Brandon, FL
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/53521

Dr. Carol Foulds
Overland Park, KS
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/864847

Dr. Cheryl Geer
Camarillo, CA
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/6538

Dr. Gregg Govett
Midwest City, OK
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/155754

Dr. Ryan Haygood
Shreveport, LA
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/107003

Dr. Samuel Lam
Plano, TX
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/398875

Dr. Maureen Muoneke
ELLICOTT CITY, MD
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/426227

Dr. Miguel Pappolla
Houston, TX
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/3208522

Dr. Laura Regan
Richmond, VA
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/866066

Dr. C. Andrew Salzberg
Tarrytown, NY
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/6968

Dr. Robert Schwartz
Greenville, SC
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/899

Dr. Nicolas Slenkovich
Denver, CO
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/576584

Dr. Bret Tobler
Lehi, UT
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/2724981

Dr. Chris Tye
Colleyville, TX
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/173014

Dr. Narayan Verma
WARREN, MI
http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/294928
RateMDsJohn is offline  
#2 Old 03-07-2009, 06:21 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What is strange about both

What is strange about both of the docs listed here is that neither were seriously bad. I would still go to either of them (always take other's opinions with a grain of salt right?). So i find it strange that they would have patients sign a waiver. It is an odd presentation as well isn't it? If i were to see an MD for the first time (or any medical practitioner, Acupuncturist, whatever) and they were forcing me to sign a waiver such as this prior to treatment i would wonder what in heaven's name are they hiding from? My initial confidence would be tainted with "are you going to do something inappropriate? Are you going to be incompetent, rude, intimidating?" This would cloud my relationship even if the MD was perfectly capable of treating me. I wonder if they take that into consideration.
At any rate, Thomas Jefferson would be pleased to know that the first amendment is still alive and well.
Jellyphish is offline  
#3 Old 04-22-2009, 05:46 PM
Senior Member
 
MicOnTheNorthShore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 5,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Canadian Medical Malpractice

MicOnTheNorthShore is offline  
#4 Old 04-22-2009, 09:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 718
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd be interested to know if

I'd be interested to know if there's Legal Precedence for this, either in the U.S. or Canada? If not, how long will it take for a patient(s) to take this to the highest court in the land? The highest court seats judges, not physicians.
Cristal_Artist is offline  
#5 Old 04-22-2009, 10:27 PM
Senior Member
 
MicOnTheNorthShore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 5,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Cristal_Artist wrote: I'd

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristal_Artist
I'd be interested to know if there's Legal Precedence for this, either in the U.S. or Canada? If not, how long will it take for a patient(s) to take this to the highest court in the land? The highest court seats judges, not physicians.
What issue would they take to the court? The "gag order" currently being floated is a consensual agreement. There are limits to CCRF (Canada) and the First Amendment (USA) such as yelling fire in a crowded theatre or consenting to not make disclosure.

The best defence is simply to not enter into any such agreement. I'd walk if any physician or surgeon presented me with a non-disclosure agreement pertaining to my care.
MicOnTheNorthShore is offline  
#6 Old 04-28-2009, 01:17 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 41
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have to agree. If a doctor

I have to agree. If a doctor asked me to sign a non-disclosure, I'd be questioning what little faith he/she has in themselves to treat me. Do they think they may "screw up" or that their personality is really that offensive? The best thing that could ever happen is the ability to go online and find others who have had an experience with a specific doctor....this site is awesome! People do research on the cars they buy, the house or apartment they buy or rent and just about anything else in their lives so why not the doctors they see? I do not believe I'd have back surgery if I couldn't research my potential surgeons.
I spoke to both surgeons and asked, do you have a list of references? They both looked at me strangely. I realize with HIPAA, the guidelines are short but with today's medical advancement, I'd expect a doctor or surgeon to ask..."Would you like to be considered a reference for potential patients to contact?" Typically references speak about only the positive aspects of a person's character but if as a patient, you were asked BEFORE treatment, then if the treatment did not go well, you could give an honest account of what you experienced. Even with places like this, you have to take all the reviews into consideration because you do not know the people and they could be fabricating their experience, exaggerating or the treatment's outcome may have not been causes by the surgeon. This just gives you a little more comfort that you are making the best possible decision. I'm not a surgeon but I am expected to make educated decisions on which surgeon is correct and which one isn't. Again, thanks John for this place!

blondie09631 is offline  
#7 Old 04-29-2009, 08:02 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: Doctors Forcing

analyst13-banned is offline  
#8 Old 05-02-2009, 09:56 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's the point! The

That's the point! The doctors here AREN'T bad. They're "pissed off" about being abused. They are fighting to protect themselves from being libeled on the internet without any recourse. Which until now was the reality of the situation. Slander and libel are not protected free speech so the First Amendment to the Constitution does not apply here. On the site RateMD's.com anyone may post anything they like about any physician and the doctor can't respond. The posts are anonymous. The same poster can make repeated comments at 30 day intervals I believe. This allows for repeated abuse. The site allows posters to write virtually anything. The comments don't even have to come from a patient because nothing is verified about the person posting or the rating. The rating could come from a disgruntled employee, ex-boyfriend or even a competing physician. This isn't an assault on patients rights. There doesn't exist the right to make defamatory public comments which are untrue or can't be verified about non-public figures. The law protects us (or should) against these assaults. At least until the advent of the Internet. Because of certain cyber law statutes doctors can't force these rating sites to remove a comment no matter what it says or how little it lacks validity. Nor can they sue the site because of their disclaimers. The waiver gives the doctor a legal method to remove libelous comments from the site. You can still say that you "can't stand Dr. X" to your family, friends and others. You can report him to his State Board, your insurance carrier and the Better Business Bureau. All legitimate venues for complaint. Dr. X, however, is not permitted to say to anyone even his wife that he "can't stand you" because that would violate your HIPPA rights. For this reason (your HIPPA rights) he risks a fine of hundreds of thousands of dollars if he
directly responds to your negative posting. Fair huh? So rather I consider this a "Wall
of Honor" for physicians who stand up to bullies. By the way the individual who developed
this site had a similar site which defamed college professors. Who's next?
ccf-banned is offline  
#9 Old 05-02-2009, 10:10 PM
Senior Member
 
MicOnTheNorthShore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 5,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ccf wrote: That's the

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccf
That's the point! The doctors here AREN'T bad. They're "pissed off" about being abused. They are fighting to protect themselves from being libeled on the internet without any recourse. Which until now was the reality of the situation. Slander and libel are not protected free speech so the First Amendment to the Constitution does not apply here. On the site RateMD's.com anyone may post anything they like about any physician and the doctor can't respond. The posts are anonymous. The same poster can make repeated comments at 30 day intervals I believe. This allows for repeated abuse. The site allows posters to write virtually anything. The comments don't even have to come from a patient because nothing is verified about the person posting or the rating. The rating could come from a disgruntled employee, ex-boyfriend or even a competing physician. This isn't an assault on patients rights. There doesn't exist the right to make defamatory public comments which are untrue or can't be verified about non-public figures. The law protects us (or should) against these assaults. At least until the advent of the Internet. Because of certain cyber law statutes doctors can't force these rating sites to remove a comment no matter what it says or how little it lacks validity. Nor can they sue the site because of their disclaimers. The waiver gives the doctor a legal method to remove libelous comments from the site. You can still say that you "can't stand Dr. X" to your family, friends and others. You can report him to his State Board, your insurance carrier and the Better Business Bureau. All legitimate venues for complaint. Dr. X, however, is not permitted to say to anyone even his wife that he "can't stand you" because that would violate your HIPPA rights. For this reason (your HIPPA rights) he risks a fine of hundreds of thousands of dollars if he
directly responds to your negative posting. Fair huh? So rather I consider this a "Wall
of Honor" for physicians who stand up to bullies. By the way the individual who developed
this site had a similar site which defamed college professors. Who's next?
Get a grip. You cannot blame social ills on technology. This site is a facilitator, not a publisher, and cannot be held liable in much the same way as a printer cannot be held liable for a publisher's dissemination of writers' comments.

HIPPA rights have little to do with anything regarding patients' comments. It is the physician who holds themselves out to criticism as the provider of a service, not the patient. That is a common burden in commerce.

No site developed by the developer of this site has defamed college professors. If anyone has been defamed, it's been by posters, not the site nor the developer or owner.

What would you blame next, the Internet? Perhaps it should be sued. :lol:

I wouldn't restrict your comments to US law, either. Almost half the participants on this site's forum are citizens and residents of countries outside the US.

It's interesting that you should avail yourself of the forum provided by the very party whom you accuse of libelous activity, to voice your libel.
MicOnTheNorthShore is offline  
#10 Old 05-02-2009, 11:25 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Your comments are untrue and

Your comments are untrue and your argument infantile. As for your employer, John Swapceinski, owner of this site... he is the founder of RateMyProfessors and RateMyTeachers.com. Just "Google" it folks. Following your line of reasoning then you wouldn't mind my posting info about your career as a pediphile, or drunkard or wifebeater right? That's free speech right? Yes, we know John's hiding behind his role as facilitator. He's done this before and brags that he's never been sued. Well there's a first time for everything. By the way I looked at the postings of the four doctors on the "wall of shame." Did you notice that they all have the exact same negative posting comment with the exact same rankings of "3" rating their competence as physicians even though the four doctors are located in four different states. Boy, that patient sure gets around or could it be that the postings aren't in fact from patients but created by RateMDs.com to punish the doctors who stood up to Mr. Swapceinski? Hmmmmm?
ccf-banned is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome