Privacy Rights
Weaver v. Myers: The Future of Ex Parte Communication in Florida Medical Malpractice by Brian W. Boelens(July/August) was a particularly one-sided article from the defense industry and an insurancecompany advocate. The article misconstrues both the purpose of ex parte communications andFlorida’s pre-suit investigation. I find The Florida Bar generally requires a higher standard of equalcontribution from both perspective sides of an argument.
Protecting a person’s right to privacy is not “a new normal,” but is, in fact, a continuation of a time–held tradition of confidentiality between a patient and their doctor. The article takes a distortedview of Weaver, which in effect, upheld Florida’s constitutional right to privacy and did not allowthis constitutional right to expire upon the death of a patient. In truth, Weaver is not a win forplaintiffs’ attorneys as suggested in the article, but instead is a “win” for patients and theirunfettered right to privacy and confidential communications with their doctors. In addition, the author fails to provide insight as to how he came up with his defense of Florida’s pre-suitrequirements. Lastly, the article fails to acknowledge the exaggerated claims of malpracticein Florida and the most recent Florida Supreme Court case, which debunks the alleged medicalmalpractice crisis in Florida. This important opposing view should have been included in thearticle.
