Whistleblowing Heroes - Boon or Burden?

Justifiable whistleblowing by health care professionals should not be considered morally wrong. If hospital authorities fail to take action over legitimate reported concerns, whistleblowing is likely to be the only means available to the individual to protect patients at risk of harm. Some individuals believe it is their professional duty to whistleblow. However, whistleblowing is not always praiseworthy - it depends on the motive, on the alternative remedies available, and on how serious the matter is.

As whistleblowers generally can expect to face career damage and vilification, their actions are considered heroic and supererogatory, i.e. acts that go far beyond the bounds of duty. This paper argues that there may be circumstances where whistleblowing is neither supererogatory nor heroic. More importantly, I argue that ill-advised whistleblowing brings the practice into disrepute.

Defining whistleblowing: I classify whistleblowing as an external disclosure of perceived wrongdoing by an individual to the public via the media. It is distinct from an internal disclosure.

Professional ethical guidelines

Should a doctor witness evidence of malpractice, the General Medical Council makes clear that it is a doctor's duty to protect patients by stating: 'You must protect patients when you believe that a doctor's or other colleague's health, conduct or performance is a threat to them.' (1) At this stage, the concerned doctor is encouraged to report his evidence to the appropriate hospital authorities. In the event that no action is taken, the General Medical Council states: 'If your local procedures fail or are not suitable, you should refer the case to us.' (2)

The British Medical Association is more circumspect on this matter. Its guidebook on medical ethics states: 'Since the B.M.A. considers there is an ethical duty for doctors to take action against unsafe standards of care, it follows that they should also support, and not discriminate against, those who are brave enough to speak out about standards which are indeed unacceptable.' (3)