Rotterdam dentist exposed patient’s medical info in online feud, receives warning

A dentist in Rotterdam has received an official warning after angrily responding to a patient’s negative review by publicly sharing the patient’s medical details and making disparaging remarks. The disciplinary board ruled that the dentist had engaged in similar behavior before and issued the warning as a formal reprimand.

The dispute began two years ago when the patient had an intake appointment at the Rotterdam dental practice. The visit cost 117 euros, which the patient found excessive. After raising concerns about the fee, the practice refused to adjust the bill.

The patient later left a critical review on Zorgkaart Nederland, a Dutch healthcare review website. In the review, he claimed the consultation lasted only five minutes, during which the dentist examined an X-ray and stated that there were no dental issues. The reviewer also mentioned that he had asked the dentist about specific concerns but felt dismissed. “I asked him about a few points of concern; however, he came across as arrogant and sarcastically dismissed my worries,” he wrote. He rated the practice with a score of 1 in almost all categories.

The dentist reacted strongly to the review, defending his actions and publicly criticizing the patient. In his response, he claimed that he had "professionally disproved" the patient’s concerns.

“This has nothing to do with arrogance but more with the fact that you, as a layperson, had your own ‘ideas’ about your oral health,” the dentist wrote. He added, “If I, as a layperson, were to ask a dentist, doctor, or medical professional for advice and were told that there was nothing wrong, I would personally feel relieved and happy... but apparently, that is different for you.”

The response included medical details about the patient’s case, which violated privacy regulations. Zorgkaart Nederland removed the dentist’s comment after a few weeks.

The patient filed a complaint with the disciplinary board, which determined that the dentist had acted unprofessionally. The board noted that this was not the first time the dentist had engaged in such behavior. During the hearing, the dentist admitted that he had crossed a line. He stated that he believed he had the right to defend himself against a bad review but acknowledged that he had gone too far. He also issued an apology.

Before the disciplinary board's decision, a separate mediation body that handles disputes between dentists and patients had already ruled against the dentist. It described his comments as “not only unprofessional but also inappropriate and offensive.”