This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Joseph P. Wood, MD, JD
Edward Hospital Association Naperville, Ill

JAMA. 1992;268(1):50.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—The article by Sugarman and Powers entitled "How the Doctor Got Gagged"¹ incorrectly characterizes the recent Supreme Court decision in Rust v Sullivan² as a "significant departure from established precedent." Apparently, this "significant departure" follows from their misperception of a general recognition by the judiciary of a right to "unrestricted communication within the physician-patient relationship." In reality, there is a long history of judicial tolerance of governmental regulation of physician-patient communication. Moreover, there is nothing in the constitution that explicitly denies the right of the people to regulate the delivery of medical care.

One may ask, wouldn't we be better off if there was a recognized right to privacy in physician-patient communications? Indeed, as a practicing physician, I believe there should be such a right. The recent Supreme Court decision in Rust does not close the door to the establishment of such a right. What . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?