Defamatory Online Reviews: What Australian Doctors Can Actually Do    

Not every negative review is defamatory, and not every defamatory review warrants legal action. Your first step is a professional, confidentiality-compliant response. If the review is clearly false and seriously damaging, your medico-legal insurer can help you escalate — but be aware that legal action often draws more attention than the review itself. 

Online reviews have become a significant and largely unavoidable feature of modern medical practice. A patient who feels dismissed, a family member who disagrees with a clinical decision, or — in some cases — someone who was never your patient at all can post a damaging review that appears prominently in search results for years. 

Doctors face a challenge that most other professionals do not: strict patient confidentiality obligations prevent you from publicly defending yourself by discussing the specifics of any consultation — even when the review is factually wrong. This guide explains your options and, critically, what not to do. 

Why Online Reviews Create a Unique Problem for Doctors 

This means: you cannot reply to a Google review saying ‘that’s not what happened in your consultation.’ Doing so may confirm the person was your patient, disclose clinical information, and trigger both a Privacy Act complaint and a potential AHPRA complaint — all while trying to defend your reputation. 

The Core Tension: You have a right to defend your reputation. You also have an obligation to protect patient confidentiality. Any response to an online review must navigate both — and get both right. This is why template responses and professional guidance matter. 

What Is Defamation Under Australian Law? 

A statement is defamatory if it: 

• Was published — communicated to at least one third party (a public online review clearly satisfies this) 

• Identified you — the review must refer to you specifically (even without naming you, if it is clear from context) 

• Caused or is likely to cause serious harm to your reputation — since 2021 reforms, a ‘serious harm’ threshold must be met before proceedings can begin 

Not every negative review meets this threshold. A review saying ‘the wait time was too long’ or ‘the doctor seemed rushed’ may be unflattering but is unlikely to be defamatory. A review falsely accusing you of misdiagnosis, sexual misconduct, charging fraudulently, or being incompetent in a specific way could cross the line. 

Key Post-2021 Reform: Since reforms to the Model Defamation Provisions that took effect in most states from 2021, a ‘concerns notice’ must be sent before proceedings commence, and a ‘serious harm’ threshold applies. This creates an additional step but also an opportunity to resolve matters before litigation. See the NSW Law Reform Commission’s defamation overview for background. 

Your Options: A Comparison 

Option 1: Request Removal From the Platform 

Google and most major review platforms have policies against fake, misleading, and harassing content. You can flag a review for removal if it: 

• Was posted by someone who was never your patient 

• Contains demonstrably false factual claims 

• Violates the platform’s terms of service (harassment, spam, conflict of interest) 

• Was posted as part of a coordinated attack by a competitor or former staff member 

Keep records of every review you report, when you reported it, and Google’s response. If a review is not removed and you proceed to legal action, this documentation demonstrates you attempted to resolve the matter informally. 

Option 2: Respond Professionally — Without Breaching Confidentiality 

A well-crafted professional response is almost always the right first move, regardless of whether you pursue other options. A response serves several purposes: 

• It demonstrates to potential patients reading the review that you take concerns seriously 

• It contextualises the review without confirming clinical details 

• It provides an opportunity for the reviewer to resolve matters privately 

The key principles for a compliant response: 

• Do not confirm or deny that the reviewer was your patient 

• Do not refer to any clinical details, diagnoses, appointments, or treatments 

• Thank the reviewer for raising their concern 

• Acknowledge that you take all feedback seriously 

Invite them to contact the practice directly to discuss 

 Sample Response Template “Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback. We take all concerns about our care seriously and strive to provide the highest standard of service to every person who attends our practice. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss your experience further — please contact our practice manager directly at [phone/email] so we can address your concerns properly.” 

Option 3: Send a Formal Legal Demand (Concerns Notice) 

Under the post-2021 defamation reforms, a ‘concerns notice’ must be sent to the publisher before defamation proceedings can be commenced. This notice identifies the allegedly defamatory material and what you require — typically removal and possibly an apology. 

In practice, a well-drafted concerns notice sent by a lawyer is often effective at securing removal without the need for litigation. Many reviewers — on learning they face potential defamation proceedings — remove the review promptly. 

This option is appropriate where: 

• The review contains demonstrably false factual statements 

• The review has caused or is likely to cause serious reputational harm 

• Platform removal requests have been unsuccessful 

• The identity of the reviewer is known or discoverable 

Option 4: Defamation Proceedings 

Defamation litigation is a significant undertaking and should be considered carefully. It is expensive, time-consuming, and uncertain in outcome. In some cases, it draws far more attention to the review than would otherwise occur — the ‘Streisand effect’. 

Before proceeding, consider: 

• Can the reviewer be identified? Anonymous reviews create obvious practical difficulties 

• Does the review meet the serious harm threshold? 

• What is the reach of the review — how many people are likely to have seen it? 

• Are you prepared for the potential publicity that comes with legal proceedings? 

• Has mediation or a concerns notice been attempted first? 

What About Reviews That Target Your Staff or Practice? 

Reviews that threaten or harass staff, make false claims about administrative processes, or constitute a pattern of targeted harassment may give rise to additional legal remedies — including applications for injunctions restraining online harassment in serious cases. 

If a patient is using online reviews as part of a broader campaign of harassment, document everything and seek legal advice. Courts have granted injunctions in cases involving repeated, co-ordinated attacks on practitioners and practices. 

AHPRA Advertising Guidelines: What Doctors Must Know 

section 133 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law 

• You should not reproduce patient reviews in your own advertising materials 

• Responding to a review in a way that functions as a testimonial for your services may breach these guidelines 

• Soliciting positive reviews specifically for advertising purposes is also problematic 

These are important constraints — but they do not prevent you from professionally responding to reviews or from pursuing defamatory content through legal channels. 

Frequently Asked Questions 

Q: Can I ask Google to reveal who posted an anonymous negative review? 

Q: A former employee has left a series of negative reviews. Is that defamation? 

Potentially, yes — and it may also constitute workplace harassment or stalking depending on the pattern of conduct. The law governing reviews posted by former employees or competitors is the same defamation law, but these cases may be stronger as the reviewer’s lack of patient experience is more easily established. Document the reviews and seek advice. 

Q: What if I know the reviewer was never my patient? 

This is one of the clearest scenarios for a removal request and, if removal fails, legal action. A review purporting to be from a patient who never attended your practice is a false factual statement. Keep records that demonstrate the reviewer was not in your patient database, and proceed with a platform removal request as a first step. 

Q: Should I respond to every negative review? 

Not necessarily every one — but a consistent, professional response policy demonstrates to future readers that you are engaged and accountable. Reviews with one or two stars and no written content often don’t merit a response. Reviews with specific false allegations usually do, provided you can respond without breaching confidentiality. 

Q: Can my medical indemnity insurance cover defamation legal costs? 

This varies significantly by policy. Some medico-legal insurance policies include assistance with defamation matters, particularly where the review relates to your clinical practice. Check your policy and contact your insurer to clarify your coverage before incurring legal costs. 

This publication is general in nature and is not comprehensive or constitutes legal or medical advice. You should seek legal, medical or other professional advice before relying on any content, and practice proper clinical decision making with regard to individual circumstances. Persons implementing any recommendations contained in this publication must exercise their own independent skill or judgment or seek appropriate professional advice relevant to their own particular practice. Compliance with any recommendations will not in any way guarantee discharge of the duty of care owed to patients and others coming into contact with the health professional or practice. Tego Insurance Pty Ltd is not responsible to you or anyone else for any loss suffered in connection with the use of this information.

All content on this page has been written in a generic way, and has not been presented with any knowledge of your personal objectives or financial needs.