Dutch Surgeon Wins Landmark 'Right To Be Forgotten' Case (theguardian.com)
AmiMoJo shares a report from The Guardian: A Dutch surgeon formally disciplined for her medical negligence has won a legal action to remove Google search results about her case in a landmark "right to be forgotten" ruling. The doctor's registration on the register of healthcare professionals was initially suspended by a disciplinary panel because of her postoperative care of a patient. After an appeal, this was changed to a conditional suspension under which she was allowed to continue to practice. But the first results after entering the doctor's name in Google continued to be links to a website containing an unofficial blacklist, which it was claimed amounted to "digital pillory." It was heard that potential patients had found the blacklist on Google and discussed the case on a web forum. The surgeon's lawyer, Willem van Lynden, said the ruling was groundbreaking in ensuring doctors would no longer be judged by Google on their fitness to practice. "Now they will have to bring down thousands of pages: that is what will happen, in my view. There is a medical disciplinary panel but Google have been the judge until now. They have decided whether to take a page down -- and why do they have that position?" Van Lynden said.
Now they will have to bring down thousands of pages: that is what will happen, in my view. There is a medical disciplinary panel but Google have been the judge until now. They have decided whether to take a page down -- and why do they have that position?" Van Lynden said.
It sounds like Van Lynden doesn't know how the internet works. Google can't "take down" anything. All it can do is remove references from its search results. I would love to hear an explanation for the technical aspects of how this would be done. Are Google's algorithms really that good that they can "de-list" certain websites but only for very specific search terms? What happens when/if this doctor gets put on the naughty list again? Are they required to de-list the next blog that people decide to comment on? This is very interesting from both a "free speech" (and yes, I realize this isn't a US story) and from a technical perspective.
OK, got it. All this Dutch is killing me! According to this Dutch website, the doctor's name is Rita Kappel and the black list in question is here.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
So Dr. Rita Kappel was initially disciplined and her right to practice was suspended because of her postoperative care of a patient - but then her disciplinary action was altered to allow her to continue to practice. However the overall disciplinary action remains intact and on her record.
Do I have those facts regarding Dr. Rita Kappel correct?
#DeleteChrome
The story being, basically a weekend plastic surgeon that uses a rented theatre and cheap gig economy nurses in surgery, did a quick dirty, boobie deflation job. After sending the gig economy cheap surgery team home, who are too expensive and leaving the victim in the care of general nurse after the weekend surgeon wandered off counting the profits. Well the victim was not quite sealed up and was leaking, a lot, rather than put together a proper surgical team. The doctor sort of botched one up with the nurses available to get the victim done with as fast as possible, costing the surgeon money now and well, quite the awkward mess, all those amateurs in a room and after lots of bleeding and mess an hour and a half latter the patient sealed up.
Going in for surgery, go with a surgeon who works in a real hospital and where you will have doctors and nurses of all sorts on tap. Go to a weekend hacker that rents an surgery by the hour and brings on gig economy party time surgical 'er' specialists, and is looking to make as much profit as possible, as in spend as little as possible and push the gig economy workers out the surgery door as fast as possible.
When going in for surgery, ask which hospital and full time staff, don't go to the rental surgery and the gig economy workers, it's cheaper for a reason. That doctors special gig is https://www.drkappel.nl/ and https://www.drkappel.nl/, when it comes to inflato boobies she works the flip side, deflation. Runs a whole 'Institute' of medical practices web site (I'll bet it wants goggle search to remember that), when in reality a surgeon on the cheap, rented surgery and gig economy surgical staff the cheapest available, to maximise profits and good luck for the victims.
Most people going to a surgery would expect the doctor and the surgical team to know each other well and be practised working together so as not to make mistakes and during and post surgery, a lot of resources accessible for problems, not to be left in the lurch, bleeding out.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
How about this. Someone accuses you of sexual assault. It's proven to be false and you're cleared of all charges, but now, when you Google your name, details of your sexual assault accusation show up.
Right to be forgotten lets you remove that because you're innocent. But the Court of Google means you're a sexual predator forever.
Is that fair?
How about something else - you get arrested for pot smoking when you're 17. When you turn 18, your record gets wiped. But the Court of Google indexed that so now everyone thinks you're a pothead because you got arrested, even though legally you're in the clear, and even worse, your record was actually expunged upon turning 18. But Google and the Internet doesn't care.
Of course, no one would notice - a criminal background check will reveal nothing of either situation - the first was cleared, the second was expunged. But now someone does a simple Google and everyone is suddenly looking at you funny, thinking you're a pothead and sexual predator and why aren't you fired yet.
People lose jobs because of their social media postings, which is why it's generally a good idea to go through what you post and clean it up. But while you can clean up your social media, you can't clean up what Google and the Internet have heard about you, even if it's no longer true. Imagine being denied a job just because of something you were accused of, but didn't do. Even a court of law says you didn't go it. But just because you allegedly did it, you did it.
“Rita Kappel from Zwolle”: https://translate.google.com/t...