Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Colleagues: to protect or not?

P A Plumeri

    Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology
    |December 1, 1984
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Gastroenterologists should prioritize honesty when patients ask about suing colleagues. Focus opinions on medical issues, avoid legal advice, and understand the risks of acting as an expert witness.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Colonoscopic gamble.

    The American journal of gastroenterology·2001
    Same author

    Managed care and risk management.

    Gastroenterology clinics of North America·1998
    Same author

    Managed care, or Scope hits the Sphinx.

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·1995
    Same author

    Endoscopic training directors: a few legal and ethical considerations.

    Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America·1995
    Same author

    Informed consent for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

    Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America·1994
    Same author

    Informed consent for gastrointestinal endoscopy in the '90s and beyond.

    Gastrointestinal endoscopy·1994
    Same journal

    GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Hepatic Encephalopathy in Cirrhosis: A Protective Signal Requiring Cancer and Nutritional Phenotyping.

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
    Same journal

    Endoscopic Incisional Therapy for Benign Esophageal Strictures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
    Same journal

    International Consensus Statements on the Use of Topical Endoscopic Hemostatic Powders in the Treatment of Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
    Same journal

    Do Risk Factors for Reflux Symptoms After Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy Necessarily Increase the Occurrence of Postoperative Gastroesophageal Reflux?

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
    Same journal

    Subgroup Stratification by Regimen, Geography, and Population Is Necessary to Validate Nitazoxanide-based Helicobacter pylori Eradication Therapy.

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
    Same journal

    The Impact of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists Versus Diabetes Mellitus on Endoscopic Procedures: A Case-Control Study From a Large Tertiary Care Health System.

    Journal of clinical gastroenterology·2026
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Ethics
    • Gastroenterology

    Background:

    • Limited literature exists on how gastroenterologists should respond to patient inquiries about suing peers.
    • This situation presents a significant ethical and professional challenge for clinicians.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To provide a framework for clinical gastroenterologists facing patient questions about litigation against other practitioners.
    • To emphasize ethical conduct and professional boundaries in such sensitive situations.

    Main Methods:

    • Literature review on medical ethics and professional conduct.
    • Analysis of basic legal principles relevant to medical practice, including defamation.
    • Discussion of the role and challenges of expert witness testimony.

    Main Results:

    Related Experiment Videos

    • Basic honesty is the most crucial principle.
    • Equivocation, obfuscation, and 'white lies' are discouraged.
    • Gastroenterologists must differentiate between medical opinions and legal advice.

    Conclusions:

    • Adherence to honesty and ethical principles is paramount.
    • Professionals should limit their scope to medical expertise, avoiding legal pronouncements.
    • Awareness of defamation and expert witness responsibilities is essential for gastroenterologists.