New York Times Columnist Frank Bruni Violates Patient Privacy, Then Gets Nasty With Newt
New York Times reporter turned columnist Frank Bruni is on a nasty streak. He devoted his long Sunday Review column, "Rethinking His Religion," to a former classmate with a pat liberal morality lesson that seemed a lot like an invasion of patient privacy, then attacked Newt Gingrich and insulted Gingrich's wife. James Taranto at Best of the Web explained:
New York Times columnist Frank Bruni has some insufferable friends. Yesterday he spent nearly 1,500 words profiling one of them, a classmate at the University of North Carolina whom he knew at the time as a conservative frat boy who "attended Catholic services every Sunday in a jacket and tie." Bruni, who is gay, "kept a certain distance from him" under the assumption that the young man, whom he does not name in the column, would be hostile to the future Timesman because of his sexual orientation.
"About two years ago, out of nowhere, he found me," Bruni reports. A correspondence ensued in which Bruni apologized "for misjudging him." The man was not as one-dimensional as Bruni had imagined, and he had changed since his undergraduate days.
Bruni's classmate did a lot of reading after graduation, which led him to question his faith. He also became a physician, as he had planned, but his career took an unplanned turn: "As a doctor, he has spent a part of his time providing abortions." Bruni allows that "for some," this story "will be proof positive of Rick Santorum's assertion last month that college is too often godless and corrupting." For "others," evidently including Bruni, it is "a resounding affirmation of education's purpose."
Bruni recounted a suspiciously on-the-nose morality lesson his doctor friend told him:
He shared a story about one of the loudest abortion foes he ever encountered, a woman who stood year in and year out on a ladder, so that her head would be above other protesters’ as she shouted “murderer” at him and other doctors and “whore” at every woman who walked into the clinic.
One day she was missing. “I thought, ‘I hope she’s O.K.,’ ” he recalled. He walked into an examining room to find her there. She needed an abortion and had come to him because, she explained, he was a familiar face. After the procedure, she assured him she wasn’t like all those other women: loose, unprincipled.
She told him: “I don’t have the money for a baby right now. And my relationship isn’t where it should be.”
“Nothing like life,” he responded, “to teach you a little more.”
A week later, she was back on her ladder.
Taranto concluded:
It's just too perfect a liberal morality tale ("some" will consider it an immorality tale) not to raise red flags as a likely urban legend.
But what if it is true?
Physicians have a duty to keep medical information about their patients confidential. Some of them take this obligation very seriously: Our internist once told us that a friend of hers (who is also an acquaintance of ours) mentioned our name in conversation, and she did not tell him that she knew us lest she run afoul of the doctor-patient relationship.
To be sure, Bruni's friend did not identify his patient by name. But standing on a ladder outside an abortion clinic and shouting "murderer" and "whore" is, to say the least, unusual behavior. The number of women who have a history of doing so "year in and year out" cannot be much greater than one. Thus if this woman's friends, relatives or fellow protesters happen to read Bruni's column, it is very likely that they will make the connection and learn that she had an abortion.
We'd say the doctor is guilty of a gross violation of medical ethics--unless, of course, he was pulling Bruni's leg. As for Bruni, if he retold a false story believing it to be true, he hasn't violated journalistic ethics à la Stephen Glass, Jay Forman and Jayson Blair, who knowingly published fiction under the guise of fact, though he has displayed a flabbergasting gullibility.
But that is not the most unattractive thing this incident tells us about Bruni. Assuming that he recounted this story in good faith, he thought nothing of violating a troubled woman's privacy in order to score an ideological point.
An ideological point about the "right to privacy."
Ramesh Ponnuru wasn't impressed with Bruni either: "...what’s the point of the column? Near as I can tell, it’s that liberals should look past their prejudices against fellow college students who wear suits to Mass, because some of them turn out to be really thoughtful, as evidenced by their growing up to be abortionists."
Then on Tuesday, Bruni published a poison pen farewell wish to Newt Gingrich, lamenting both the former Speaker of the House's campaign and the irresponsible "beast" of the media for encouraging him and calling for the media to cut off coverage of Gingrich, and made a personal crack about the candidate's wife Callista.
It’s time to cut Newt out of our diets.
He has no nutritional value, certainly not at this point, as he peddles his ludicrous guarantee of $2.50-a-gallon gasoline, a promise that would be made only by someone with his own bottomless strategic reserve of crude. Doubly oily entendre intended.
There were calls for him to desist two weeks ago, after he lost Alabama, which abuts his home state of Georgia. But they fell on a deaf Newt.
There were fresh appeals last week, when he failed to wring even one measly delegate from Illinois on Tuesday and then Louisiana on Saturday. But Newt doesn’t need anything as prosaic as delegates, so long as there’s still pocket lint from Sheldon Adelson and the warmth of Callista’s frozen smile.
....
Great politicians are memorialized with holidays, monuments, libraries. For Newt I think an ice cream flavor is in order, something in the clogged vein of Chubby Hubby or Chunky Monkey, although not so physique-focused. Nutty Professor is too obvious a suggestion, though it opens the door to pralines, aptly Southern.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
I don't believe a word of it...
Submitted by rhondacoleridge on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 2:44pm.
I just don't - too far-fetched.
It's coming out of his ears
Submitted by thestalkinghorse on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:02pm.
I think he should be made to produce names.
Having to go around and lecture the entire world on morality must be a dreadful burden.This story is so obviously fake that only a loyal NY Times reader could possibly believe it. The comments accompanying the piece were ridiculous. They should have put an air sickness bag in the comics section, that way at least readers of the print version could continue on to the crossword puzzle.
<throws BS flag>
Submitted by motherbelt on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 2:54pm.
I guess you really CAN make this stuff up.
Irving Kristol once said . . .
Submitted by WingletDriver on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 2:55pm.
A Neocon is "a liberal who has been mugged by reality. A neoliberal is a liberal who got mugged by reality but has not pressed charges." This story is made up by a liberal with no sense of reality.
I think he just did
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 2:59pm.
Nothing like a leftist apocryphal tale to stir up hate.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
"Hark the sound ...."
Submitted by Newsbubba on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 3:02pm.
We are talking about the University of North Carolina here, conveniently located in the Peoples Republic of Chapel Hill. Right?
That's the same place that didn't want their sacred name mentioned on the same radio station that Rush Limbaugh is on.
I guess they thought that it might tarnish their liberal tendency to cheat at football or something.
If you ain't gay, or a liberal, or both when you arrive in Chapel Hill, chances are extremely high that you will be before you escape.
Bruni's "story" is an often repeated fraud.
Submitted by TE on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 3:05pm.
Abortionists and abortion enthusiasts like Frank Bruni ROUTINELY allege that an unnamed, alleged "abortion protester" who protested "for years and years" has subsequently gone to a noble abortionist to get an abortion claiming that she "just could not have a baby ...." It's the biggest, most repeated fraud of the abortion industry/lobby and predictably can not be verified. Don't forget Bruni's unsubstantiated fantasy because you'll be hearing the same tale in a few months from a different abortionist and from different abortion enthusiasts.
BTW, if we could determine before birth that a child in the womb was a homosexual, would Frank Bruni object to aborting all of those homosexual children? If so, on what basis?
Now THERE's an EXCELLENT QUESTION!
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 4:35pm.
But of course, none of the leftist pro-abortionistas will reply.
It would cause their heads to explode.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Patient confidentiality is sacrosanct.
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 3:41pm.
With a few major exceptions (immediate harm to self/others; court order; emergency), physicians cannot and would not violate patient privacy in this manner. Even though the patient's name may not have been used, there was enough information to discern one or two possibilities for those who might have witnessed the actions which the "physician" might have told Bruni, if at all. HIPAA information requirements are onerous enough, but some states (New York among them) have patient privacy regulations which go beyond the initial requirements of HIPAA, though Bruni does not mention the state involved.
(Jayson Blair) Bruni is either lying or stretching the truth to the point of unbelievability.
As for the "good Catholic boy" definition, this too seems likely to be out of Bruni's imagination, albeit the area controlled by his genitals and not by his brains. We already know he has no sense of ethics, so why not toss in a big lie or two just for fun.
Doc Sam
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 4:19pm.
I live in PA, so I don't know if this is something you would know the answer to, but here goes. Whenever we get new insurance, the insurance company is allowed to get the records of all prescribed drugs we take. It's also my understanding that they receive the records of what individual doctors prescribe. Would you know how this bypasses patient confidentiality?
Rad
Submitted by stratman on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 7:09pm.
Health care insurers are allowed by law to review medical records of covered patients on an as needed basis. HIPAA, as well as state and federal laws, protects insurers' right to review medical documentation. After all, insurers are intimately connected to the patient and the medical record as the insurer has a duty to the patient's medical care as well as the physician's reimbursements based on documentation and need. That insurers have a fiduciary duty to their Board and investors/shareholders may complicate the matter.
The primary purpose is to control costs but they also review records, such as medications, to ascertain safety and appropriate care is delivered. An unusual example is I received a letter recently from a company that provides mail order 90-day drug supplies for a patient I saw this past summer. The patient had an operation in the fall and the Pharmaceutical supplier wrote me this winter,several months after surgery , recommending a certain class of medication to be considered (if not contraindicated). The ironic thing is I saw the patient for another physician but I got the letter because I, not the patient's primary care physician, must have been the last person to write the 90-day prescriptions.
BTW, Medicare can waltz into a physician's office at anytime and demand any and all Medicare patient records they want. The Gub'mint owns them. The Feds have more power than any private insurer, something that will only worsen if ObamaCare survives. We have much more to fear from the government getting their meat hooks more deeply than the insurers: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guards themselves?)
On most new patient paperwork, you sign
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 7:10pm.
permission for other physicians, pharmacies, providers, etc. to release information if they know about you and inquire. Much of the information, for example, prescription data and health care utilization data, is transferred from one insurance company to another if your employer or health care insurance sponsor changes. That is not always the case, but usually at least a year's data is required to properly underwrite the health insurance costs and to provide for continuity of prescription data in the event you have a drug that required a prior authorization or special payment conditions.
Also, as individual physician practices merge into larger multispecialty operations, they merge their medical records to the point where it eventually becomes a seamless experience in the ideal world. Of course, this is not an ideal world.
Any mental health records, with the exception of prescription data, are required to be maintained separately from general medical data because of mental health privacy laws.
The best thing to do is to ask your physician what is in your medical record and who has requested it. We are required in Texas to keep a record of who requests what, and this might be the case in PA.
No way.
Submitted by NeoKong on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 4:14pm.
Not buying it.
He, like many other liberal columnist make up stories to illustrate a highly improbable scenario.
While I'm sure it never happened I think he believes it surely it has happened somewhere because all people with moral conviction are phonies to him and that is what he is writing about.
Amazing -Out of nowhere, a
Submitted by JPTSO3 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 5:32pm.
Amazing -
Out of nowhere, a guy Bruni had nothing, to little in common with in school "finds" Bruni to recant not just his faith but to recount that he's a proud abortionist. What an oddly perfect storyline... I'm surprised Bruni didn't add that the good Catholic is out of the closet now - but maybe Bruni decided that was too much of a coincidence.
Bruni then finds a second unethical doctor, who is willing to violate his professional ethics, and patient privacy rights to recount an oddly perfect juxtaposing storyline about an anti-abortion-aborter, who (oddly) and perfectly manages to tell the provider her oddly perfectly diametric reasons for aborting, knowing that the abortionist knew her from constant and visible protests - and yet, she resumes her "on the ladder" protest...
How odd...how perfect... how oddly perfect. I smell a Pulitzer
Had this story been told by Steve Glass, it would have been placed at the top of BS pile, with no one bothering to check the level of BS, knowing it smelled of a bull's doodoo.
Bruni's story is more sinister
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 7:58pm.
If his old Catholic classmate had called the Sultan of Bruni and admitted (apropos of what?) that he discovered his own gayhood and came out of the closet, that would be a serious personal sin in the eyes of the Church.
But gay sex (the sinful part) is not nearly as grave an offense as performing abortions. That would be as evil as murder and would immediately excommunicate the doctor.
Story is a transparent blatent lie.
Submitted by Jonah Johansen on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 6:37pm.
Story is a transparent blatant lie.
It is possible that someone who passively opposes abortion or when asked would express opposition to abortion and then is faced with a pregnancy, might selfishly and hypocritically and seek an abortion.
Someone passionate enough about the subject to devote time and effort to protest over and over gain; does it because of deeply held moral and religious views. That person would also be well aware of the adoption alternatives so cost of the child would not be an issue.
Finally the last place they would go for an abortion is the place where she was known, the supposed reason she gave for going to the same clinic where she protested is absurd on its face.
These urban myth kind of anecdotes that the left trots out, actually reveal the degree of naivete and uncritical thinking they are subject too. Instead of smelling a rat and seeing the very dubious nature of this "story", they e-mail to all their friends.
Any competent editor would have demanded sources and assigned trustworthy fact checkers, if some reporter told them this "convenient" story.
________________
Also, be skeptical of stories which focus on the lefts favorite meme namely that everyone on the right who makes any moral ethical claim is insincere and given the opportunity to advance their own needs will hypocritically violate their supposed ethical standards; i.e. every man who opposes the gay agenda is a closet homosexual, anyone who oppose promiscuity has had secret affairs,etc.
You're wrong.
Submitted by texastommy on Thu, 03/29/2012 - 8:30am.
It's not all a lie. Clearly he knew some guy in college. After that, well, "I ain't so shore ...."
So, he kept his distance in
Submitted by Shreve on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 6:42pm.
So, he kept his distance in college from the future doctor because he was afraid the future doctor would hate him because he is gay?
Who has the phobia?
My favorite line:
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 8:22pm.
Regarding the woman on the ladder: One day she was missing. “I thought, ‘I hope she’s O.K.,’ ” he recalled.
What do these people actually believe this nonsense when they rewrite history? Year in and year out someone calls you a murderer and you hope they're ok when they're missing? Riiiggghhhhtttt.
~Yeah, it's complete bull
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 8:27pm.
It's a liberal fairy tale, fake but accurate.
Large Steaming Pile Of Road Apples
Submitted by stratman on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:17pm.
And we're to believe the woman would risk the chance of being identified entering or exiting the abortion clinic by her fellow protesters, the ones she has known from years of protesting together at that specific abortion clinic.
Next up: Communism really works - it's just that people weren't smart enough till Obama.
strat
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:22pm.
Jinx, owe me a coke.
You Got Me Rad!
Submitted by stratman on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 10:14pm.
One Coke coming up.
Thanks Strat
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 10:18pm.
I've got my own rum. ;)
Who knows
Submitted by Dan Diego on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:12pm.
There may actually be a woman that stands on a ladder protesting abortion and this is a murder's attempt to discredit her.
Lies come easy to libs.
Good point Dan
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:16pm.
Why would a woman who protests every day at an abortion center go to that center for an abortion where she would be recognized by fellow protesters?
They can't even lie well.
What's the point of the coumn? ROLFLMAO!
Submitted by thestalkinghorse on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:19pm.
I love James Taranto, but really you can't beat Ponnuru on this one.
How about...
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:22pm.
A columnist for the msm is making up stories to support a point of view?
Im sure thats
Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 03/28/2012 - 9:49pm.
What he likes about em
Nice Story
Submitted by m1xram on Thu, 03/29/2012 - 1:22am.
That was a nice story but I'm a little lost, how does that make them not-murderers? Did the children suddenly all survive or come back to life?
And this woman who fell prey to the doctors sworn to "do no harm", she didn't know about adoption from being on the picket line? Seems unbelievable on every level.
The opposite of Left is Freedom.