Britney Spears and Dr. Phil

I wondered the exact same thing, Kevin. But I didn’t even know that he was uninvited. I was more bothered by the fact that after his “session” with her, he went public with everything she said. Can anyone say “violation of privacy”?

One of the comments on the original article questioned whether a complaint can be filed against Dr Phil. I agree that his licensing board ought to investigate his behavior. I’ve seen MDs suffer serious consequences from much less egregious HIPAA violations.

Of course, then again, when you’re in Hollywood, anything goes, I guess.

Guys, I’m a licensed psychologist and on the licensing board of my state, and I know for a fact that “Dr. Phil” isn’t licensed in any state. California’s licensing board found him to be an “entertainer” and not a psychologist, so that didn’t believe he had to be licensed.

No HIPPA violation on his part, but on the part of the hospital, yea, I think so. As to her parents, they do not have a legal right, nor does Phil have a right to impose something on her against her will–and she didn’t want him there.

Can you say unethical? Perhaps a bit sleazy? Yeah.

“Another doctor – who said he was “outraged and disgusted,” added, “It is incredible that the hospital allowed Dr. Phil in her room. It’s a total violation of her rights.””

Let’s be realistic here. Hospitals are not high security units that challenge every visitor. Hospitals just aren’t celebrity balls with bouncers at the doors checking to make certain everyone is ‘on the list’. Further, once inside, it is up to the visitor to exercise some personal restraint.
Since Dr. Phil is a medical professional then in a medical setting he is expected to act like one. It wasn’t the hospital that possibly breached any HIPAA rule, it was Dr. Phil. If by chance he had a prior social relationship then he can claim a social visit; if he had a prior therapeutic relationship then he can claim doctor-patient privilege, regardless of whether he had hospital privileges.
But if he was neither of these, and he in any way practiced medicine by evidence of his questioning and interaction with her, then he is guilty of unconsented medical care and should be charged under criminal statutes for battery.

I believe the moment “Dr. Phil” asked or said anything to Britney Spears; this coupled with a reply from her, (her believing him to be a “psychologist”), constitutes “a practice.” Perhaps a neo-or quasi-practice, but this is for the legal department of a state’s professionals examining board to determine.

Consider a situation where EMTs arrive at an accident and ask a simple question or the injured party receives treatment under a physician’s supervision; this constitutes a physician-patient relationship even though the only presence of the physician is by communication. He is responsible for all that is done at his direction or from expanded role EMTs rendering more intensive care following standing, or protocol orders.

Had Britney said she would tell him nothing, and should she have asked him to depart from her presence, then no such relationship would exist. If she was ill enough not the have called for security or said “no comment” then similarly, a relationship would not be created.

The psychology board will doubtless depose both parties about the relationship, from beginning-to-end which will answer if the relationship existed. If they rule that it did, “Dr. Phil” may be sanctioned by the Board, by a District Attorney on a charge of practicing psychology (a profession) without a license for the state he is in. Also a civil exposure to monetary damages could be filed by the Spears.

I have often thought the show portrays actual cases presented by the mentally diminished, to whom, (“Dr. Phil,”) they believe has valid credentials to make the replies he does.

The program does not give a disclaimer that it is entirely a “show,” and the presenters and Dr. Phil are just acting a scenario for ratings and an audience.

As a retired physician assistant I could not host a show where persons with medical infirmities could come to me for treatment. I would be in big trouble if they even asked me to retort about a particular regimen their physician had prescribed, as to its validity. My standard answer to that question always was “I cannot say; I was not there and saw what he saw or received the benefit of the examination and history he received.” “Since I was not there, I cannot say anything about any part of the regimen he prescribed.” This even includes cases were medications used are visibly and obviously harming, rather than helping the patient.

I believe this event is going to cause the rendering of a very strict and all-encompassing action by the aforementioned authorities.

As to the comments he allegedly made after his short visit, yes, he is in violation of in-place laws governing the practitioner-patient relationship and will likely be in peril with the professional boards as well exposure to malpractice. This may also be a landmark case about any licensed professional answering questions, when there has not been an adequate history and physican examination, from which a practitioner can use the particular skills of his profession.

At the very least, “Dr. Phil” should be required to disclose his curriculum vitae to the state where his broadcast emanates. This is a record of his education, states where he was licensed to practice, and any actions brought against him in prior states. It necessarily includes his hours of continuing education, and then his reply to any charges the state alleges he is in violation of. These proceedings are usually deliberated and rendered as a “closed meeting.” He must show a greater burden of proof that he is not in opposition to state law, or likely he will receive punishment from the appropriate physchology board or board of medical (psychological) quality assurance.

I am sure there have been many who appeared on his show, gave him the history of their or theirs & others difficulties, and then relied on his guidance, believing he was compliant and within the scope of such practice in the locale where such information was being disclosed.

Time will see this play out.

By the way, he did not go out there and blab everything she said and everything that happened while he was in there. All he said was what anyone with a brain already knew, that she is in dire need of help and that he is concerned for her. He did not violate any HIPPA laws because she was NOT his patient and he was not going there to “treat” her. He did not have a “session” with her. The experts have ALREADY said this and yet everyone is still questioning it only because they want to be hateful. I bet most of the people that continue to bash him, don’t even watch his show and really listen to the content of what he says to people. And another thing. Everyone keeps getting on him saying he only did this to boost his ratings. In what world is it ok for all the media and tabloids to constantly be in her face, trash talking her and reporting every little embarrassing moment of her life,and he can’t say she needs help and he’s concerned? Whenever Dr. Phil has spoken about her, he has treated her with respect. So who is really trying to boost their ratings here? Ugghh. I’m just so disgusted with the whole thing. She’s got people around her that are enabling her to be a complete wreck, and Dr. Phil is the one everyone attacks? Get a clue people!