QUESTION:
As a part of our routine peer review process, our multi-specialty peer review committee recently requested a meeting with a physician whose case was under review.  The physician said he would only attend if he was allowed to bring his attorney.  Do we have to allow his attorney to attend this meeting?

ANSWER FROM HORTYSPRINGER ATTORNEY IAN DONALDSON:
You do not, but make sure your peer review policy supports you in making this determination!

We are strong proponents of using “collegial” discussions to address performance concerns.  However, that collegiality can quickly go out the window when attorneys are introduced into the process.  If the physician is allowed to bring their attorney, then an attorney from the hospital side is also likely going to be in attendance.  When this happens, the attorneys end up doing all the talking, instead of having a constructive, peer-to-peer discussion.  Even when the physicians at the meeting find a way to get a word in, the presence of attorneys is likely to cause the committee members to speak less candidly, as they will be worried about whether their comments might be used against them by the adverse attorney.

How can your policies help with this dilemma?  We always recommend including language that makes it clear that any collegial meetings will be held in a “no lawyer zone.”  This gives you something to put your finger on to show it is not permitted, should the question ever come up.  More importantly, this allows the invited physician and applicable committee members to have an open and frank “peer‑to‑peer” discussion about whatever issue is on the agenda.

If you have a quick question about this, e-mail Ian Donaldson at idonaldson@hortyspringer.com.