House, a medical drama about an infectious disease specialist, entertained television audiences for years as the irascible and pill-popping physician solved medical mysteries with the zeal of a modern-day Sherlock Holmes while playing mind games with his coworkers. Uncanny intuition and eccentric thinking earned the physician great respect but his bullish behavior and antisocial tendencies were a distraction at the hospital. Not only did Dr. House clash with his fellow physicians but he also insulted patients, flouted hospital rules and caused great conflict with the hospital administrators. In fact, his actions often crossed the line into obnoxiousness and rage causing the hospital staff to tiptoe around his dysfunctional behavior. In the real world, Dr. House would be labeled a “disruptive physician” and would be subjected to disciplinary action including the loss of his hospital privileges. This article will explore the problems caused by being labeled a disruptive physician in a legal context with a focus on the peer review process and the relevant court cases.

Included in

Law Commons