Psychiatry Private Practice Advertising

[MindMender1962]

Morning Folks - Can't seem to get a straight answer from my local SoCal MD professional groups on this question: Can a psychiatrist in private practice IMPLY a guaranteed outcome of services through advertising materials? Say the name of the business was "Better Living" - is that against board rules? I know that it is for my Psychologist, MFT and LCSW colleagues - no outcome can be implied.

Thanks for your feedback!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[whopper]

I'd advise you talk to a lawyer about this, but off-hand I would say no since nothing is guaranteed in medicine. One could say they can offer better odds at improvement than no treatment but not guaranteed.

Now when one "implies" this leaves some grey area.

Can a psychiatrist do this? Yes, just like they could purchase a gun and shoot people. They can't do it legally, but yeah, of course they can do it illegally and unethically. That doesn't seem to stop some people.

 

[MindMender1962]

Thanks Whopper!

 

[nitemagi]

I concur with Whopper.

 

[clusterF]

There are things you can do legally, like drink alcohol, that can still get you in trouble.
I would limit advertising in general, except to other physician groups.

 

[psych md jd]

As per their website, in order for the Medical Board of California to approve a Fictitious Name Permit, "[t]he name cannot be deceptive, misleading, confusing (B & P Code section 2415(b)(3)) or similar to a name previously issued. (CCR 1350.3)" Upon the facts presented, is the name "Better Living" deceptive, misleading, or confusing? Could be argued either way.

Advertising, is a separate issue. False, deceptive, or misleading advertisements result in liability and hefty fines. Carefully crafting the ad and using disclaimers may be ways to avoid liability.

Better call Saul.

 

[whopper]

A few months ago I wrote about the conundrums of signing a contact with a geographic clause. That is that one cannot practice in the same area (usually designated with a specific range of distance) after leaving a practice.

Someone wrote down that in California people violate this all the time, thus it's alright.

No.

But of course sometimes rules (or contracts) are only enforceable when one takes action. I wouldn't advise someone do something that violates a contract. This isn't a situation where you have a gun to your head and are being forced to practice within a distance or else be stricken to be some rapist's forced roommate for life. Usually this is a type of minor inconvenience for someone in our field.

I'm not surprised ever now when someone does exceedingly poor practice. I've seen doctors demand breast exams when there was no need to do so. I've seen doctors give out lithium without labs and destroy their patient's kidneys. I've seen doctors scream at me for challenging their medical clearance on a patient with broken legs that were untreated, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised when a doctor on the forums tells students/residents to go ahead an violate a contract. I, however, wouldn't do it.

In each of the above cases, nothing happened to the doctors I mentioned. I've only seen two doctors so far lose their license. One guy hit on patients and nurses like he was Hugh Hefner and they were all his playmates, and when he lost it, he'd been doing it for decades. The other, a psychiatrist, gave his patients rectal examinations...hundreds of them. Again, only lost his license after literally several years of doing this, getting caught, being fired from one place, then going to another place and doing it again, it went on for several years before the board finally went after him. Then guess what? He just gets a license in the next state over.

 

[psych md jd]

Actually yes, with limited exceptions.

“California has a settled public policy in favor of open competition.” Kelton v. Stravinski, 138 Cal. App. 4th 941, 946 (2006). The general rule, as embodied in section 16600 of the California Business and Professions Code (“Section 16600”) is that, with limited exceptions, “every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void.” Section 16600 is “an expression of public policy to ensure that every citizen shall retain the right to pursue any lawful employment and enterprise of their choice.” Hill Medical Corp. v. Wycoff, 86 Cal. App. 4th 895, 900, 901 (2001); Morlife, Inc. v. Perry, 56 Cal. App. 4th 1514, 1520 (1997); see also Application Group, Inc. v. Hunter Group, Inc., 61 Cal. App. 4th, 881, 900 (1998).

 

[whopper]

Interesting. This would suggest the geographic clause cannot occur in California.

 

[BobbyB]

i'm going to have the best commercials

"are you or someone you know a crazy bish? Dr. Sikkunt can help!"

"i'll prescribe FOR YOU!!!!"

(not srs)

 

[clusterF]

Geographic restriction (non compete) can only occur if you have been paid. For example I buy your practice and part of the that price is to not have you compete with me. If this were spelled out in the contract, this is enforceable in california.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

i'm going to have the best commercials

"are you or someone you know a crazy bish? Dr. Sikkunt can help!"

"i'll prescribe FOR YOU!!!!"

(not srs)

"Better call Sikkunt!"

 

[MindMender1962]

i'm going to have the best commercials

"are you or someone you know a crazy bish? Dr. Sikkunt can help!"

"i'll prescribe FOR YOU!!!!"

(not srs)

You win the internet today..

 

[jettavr6]

Someone in the Beverly Hills area had an advertising billboard which stated, "Guaranteed to leave with a prescription, or your money back." The medical board forced him to take it down.

 

[Shikima]

"Better call Sikkunt!"

I sense a spin-off for Vince Gilligan

 

[whopper]

The medical board forced him to take it down.

Wow they actually reacted. I've been saying this but I only tend to see medical boards act when the poor practice is shoved-down-your-throat so egregiously bad. Like the 30th guy reporting to the police that his doctor inappropriately demanded a rectal exam.

I've mentioned that specific case so many times I'm itching to say the guy's name, and while the case was public, I figure there's got to be some type of regulation on this forum or in the law that would prevent me from doing so. If you put in the right info on google you'll see that guy's name come up.

 

[michaelrack]

x

 

[jettavr6]

Wow they actually reacted. I've been saying this but I only tend to see medical boards act when the poor practice is shoved-down-your-throat so egregiously bad.

Yes, but this large billboard in a high traffic area qualifies for the "down your throat - so egregiously bad" label. It was so blatant, that it was impossible to ignore.