Submitted via IRC for Sulla
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 practise.
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.
Google and the Dutch data privacy watchdog, Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens, initially rejected attempts to have the links removed on the basis that the doctor was still on probation and the information remained relevant.
However, in what is said to be the first right to be forgotten case involving medical negligence by a doctor, the district court of Amsterdam subsequently ruled the surgeon had "an interest in not indicating that every time someone enters their full name in Google's search engine, (almost) immediately the mention of her name appears on the blacklist of doctors, and this importance adds more weight than the public's interest in finding this information in this way".
(Score: 1) by zoward on Tuesday January 22 2019, @12:06AM
I don't see how they can handle it any other way without potentially missing something they could be blamed for, short of having a full-time staff that does nothing but look for links to material that criticizes people on their "forgotten list". It does make you wonder: if I use Google to search for a doctor and can't find any direct links to anything about them whatsoever, should I look for a different doctor?
Also: does anyone scrub them from DuckDuckGo,Bing, etc.?