Premium
Comments on the dilemma in the April issue: ‘Social media menace?’
Author(s) -
Mullan Siobhan
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
in practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.211
H-Index - 25
eISSN - 2042-7689
pISSN - 0263-841X
DOI - 10.1136/inp.d2288
Subject(s) - dilemma , reputation , social media , power (physics) , medicine , payment , medical education , public relations , law , political science , world wide web , computer science , philosophy , physics , epistemology , quantum mechanics
The dilemma in the April issue concerned a student completing extramural studies at an emergency centre who had posted a photo of himself with a dog in recovery with the caption, ‘Me with a dog recovering from a botched operation’ on Facebook (In Practice, April 2011, volume 33, pages 190–191 ). The dog had originally been treated for wound dehiscence secondary to self trauma after an enterotomy was performed by a vet in general practice. The client recognised her dog on Facebook and demanded a refund for the initial surgery. Anne Fawcett and John Baguley commented that there were many stakeholders in this scenario. The post reflected badly on both the original vet and the emergency centre, while the university was concerned about its relationship with the profession and the reputation of its students. A possible way forward would be for the student to be counselled on professionalism and online behaviour and the implications of his actions explained. A written apology to the client, the primary vet, the university and the emergency centre might be the most effective way for the student to show their remorse. Senior emergency centre and university staff should meet with the primary vet and client to explain that the complication was due to self trauma rather than negligence of the primary vet, and emphasise the fact that the online posting was incorrect and unauthorised.