BY VALERIE HAWLEY
ST. MARY'S HEALTHCARE CENTER
CRISIS COMMUNICATIONS & REPUTATION MANAGEMENT
Guiding organizational leadership through a sensitive patient-related incident involving privacy, ethics, legal considerations and community trust.
THE CHALLENGE
A sensitive incident involving a physician affiliated with a community hospital raised significant concerns related to patient dignity, privacy, professional conduct and organizational reputation.
Although the physician was affiliated with the hospital rather than directly employed by the organization, the incident occurred within the hospital environment and required an immediate, coordinated response. In a close-knit community where information could spread quickly, leadership needed to determine how to respond responsibly while balancing patient privacy, legal requirements, medical governance and public trust.
The situation required collaboration among executive leadership, legal counsel, medical leadership, board representatives and communications.
MY ROLE
As the hospital's communications leader, I participated in the multidisciplinary leadership team responsible for evaluating the situation and determining an appropriate organizational response.
My role was to bring a public relations and reputation-management perspective to discussions that were simultaneously being evaluated through legal, clinical, governance and operational lenses.
I advocated for beginning with the organization's mission and core values rather than approaching the situation solely as a reputational or legal problem.
Those values emphasized reverence for the dignity of every person, integrity, compassion and excellence. They provided an important framework for evaluating not only what the organization was required to do, but what it believed was right to do.
The Approach
A
GROUND THE RESPONSE IN ORGANIZATIONAL VALUES
I encouraged leadership to evaluate potential responses against the hospital's established values and its responsibility to patients.
Rather than asking only, How do we minimize attention around this?, the broader question became: What response is consistent with who we say we are as an organization?
That distinction helped frame communications recommendations around accountability, patient dignity and community trust.
B
BRING THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE TO THE TABLE
The situation could not be managed by communications alone.
Leadership coordinated closely with legal counsel, medical leadership, governance representatives and other organizational stakeholders to evaluate privacy requirements, potential legal implications, physician affiliation and credentialing considerations, and the organization's responsibility to the patient and community.
Communications strategy was developed within those parameters rather than independently of them.
C
BALANCE TRANSPARENCY WITH PRIVACY
Because awareness of the incident had begun circulating within the community, remaining silent carried reputational risk of its own.
I advocated for addressing the situation rather than allowing incomplete information and speculation to define the narrative. At the same time, communications had to carefully protect patient privacy and avoid disclosing confidential information.
The resulting approach focused on accountability and organizational values without revealing protected patient information.
D
COUNSEL THROUGH DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS
Not every stakeholder initially agreed on how publicly or directly the situation should be addressed.
Part of my role was explaining the communications implications of different approaches, including how silence, defensiveness or perceived avoidance could affect trust in the hospital.
Through collaborative discussion among leadership, legal counsel and medical stakeholders, the organization developed a response that balanced transparency, accountability, privacy and due process.
E
THE RESPONSE
The hospital implemented immediate administrative and governance measures while the incident underwent appropriate review.
Communications efforts focused on acknowledging the seriousness of the situation, demonstrating accountability and protecting the privacy of those involved. A public apology from the physician became part of the broader response, allowing accountability to be communicated without disclosing confidential patient information.
Additional review and professional oversight occurred through the appropriate medical governance processes before the physician ultimately returned to practice.
THE IMPACT
Protected Patient Privacy
Communications maintained appropriate confidentiality while addressing an issue already circulating within the community.
Demonstrated Accountability
Leadership chose to address the situation rather than allowing silence or speculation to define the organization's response.
Aligned Action With Values
The hospital's established values became a practical decision-making framework during a complex ethical and reputational challenge.
Supported Community Trust
The response balanced transparency and accountability with legal, privacy and professional requirements.
Leadership
Takeaway
Crisis communications is rarely about communications alone.
The most difficult situations require communications leaders to work alongside executives, legal counsel, clinical leadership and governing bodies—often with competing priorities and incomplete information.
My approach is to begin with the organization's mission and values, understand the legal and operational boundaries, protect the people affected, and then determine how transparent the organization can responsibly be.
When reputation is at risk, protecting the organization does not necessarily mean saying less. Sometimes the strongest way to protect trust is to demonstrate that the organization is willing to hold itself accountable to the values it publicly represents.
