POISON PEN LETTERS, DUE-PROCESS, AND MEDICAL-SCHOOLS POLICIES TOWARD ANONYMOUS CORRESPONDENCE THAT DISPARAGES MEDICAL-SCHOOL FACULTY

Purpose. To learn more about the frequency of and response to poison p en letters (anonymous correspondence that disparages faculty members) in academic medicine. Method. The authors surveyed all 143 deans of me dical schools that are members of the AAMC about their practices and p olicies regarding the handling of poison pen letters. Results. Of the deans surveyed, 119 (83%) responded. Sixty-seven deans (56%) reported having received poison pen letters during their tenure. Of those, 16 ( 24%) reported that they had discarded the letters based solely on the anonymity of the authors. The remaining 51 deans (76%) reported that t hey had either sequestered, investigated, or placed the letters into t he faculty members' files, or that they had based their decisions to d iscard the letters on factors other than the authors' anonymity. Only one dean reported having a written policy for handling such correspond ence. Conclusion. This survey of AAMC schools indicates that poison pe n letters are not uncommon. The authors recommend a policy by which an onymous letters that disparage current or prospective faculty members would be categorically discarded.