Concurring Opinions has an interesting discussion of various sites listing plaintiffs, expert witness, and attorneys involved in medical malpractice litigation.
“In a disturbing development, websites are emerging to create blacklists of individuals who file medical malpractice claims. …”
I understand the point being made, but my question is whether information (that has always been public) and it now easier to obtain is a disturbing development? How is this different from credit scores and the like? Is it perhaps because the information may be somewhat incomplete and thus subject to mis-interpretation? If so, the market will likely provide better ways to interpret the data if there is money to be made. The relevant question that should be asked is whether doctors should be able to make decisions about the patients they interact with or are they public utilities with an obligation to take on all-comers?