Defenses against Sham Peer Review Discussed in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
TUSCON, Ariz. , March 10, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- False accusations of being a “disruptive physician” can ruin a physician’s career as well as cause moral injury that damages the very core of a physician’s identity, writes Lawrence Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D., in the spring issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
As the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) pointed out in 2007, the definition of “disruptive behavior” is “purposely broadly drawn, general, vague, subjective, and essentially undefined so as to allow hospital administrators to interpret it however they wish.”
“Some hospitals consider the disruptive physician label and ability to end a troublesome physician’s career via sham peer review to be a ‘useful tool,’” Dr. Huntoon writes.
To defend against false accusations, the physician must expose and discredit the lies. Credibility is the key issue. Identifying the accuser’s underlying motives may provide an avenue for attacking his credibility. Motives include professional jealousy, desire to remove a competitor, or retaliation against a whistleblower, he suggests.
Opposition research and effective cross examination are essential tools, he notes.
“Fighting false accusations of disruptive physician or professional misconduct is one of the most challenging tasks a physician can face,” Dr. Huntoon concludes. “Being labeled disruptive based on facial expression, body language, or tone of voice, when the only ‘evidence’ needed to prosecute the physician in a hospital is the accusation itself, is the very essence of absence of due process.”
He emphasizes the importance of retaining knowledgeable counsel early on.
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons is published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943.
Contact: Jane M. Orient, M.D., (520) 323-3110, janeorientmd@gmail.com
