An allegation that solicitors are bullying doctors into amending medical reports, so that higher awards can be obtained in personal injuries court cases, has been strongly rejected by the Law Society of Ireland.
Dr Maurice GuΘret had alleged solicitors were "shopping around" in order to get the best medical reports for their clients.
Speaking to The Irish Times, after initially making his claims on RT╔'s Marian Finucane radio programme, Dr GuΘret said patients were coming out worse in personal injury cases because of high legal and medical fees.
His comments, however, were criticised by Mr Ken Murphy, director-general of the Law Society, which represents solicitors. He said the society had never received a complaint about solicitors bullying doctors, but if it had happened, it was not something it would find acceptable.
Dr James Reilly, chairman of the GP committee of the Irish Medical Organisation, said there had been an element of doctors being put under pressure in the past but it did not happen any more.
Dr GuΘret said some solicitors told patients their doctor had not done the job properly so compensation would be reduced. He said he was aware of solicitors phoning doctors and asking them to amend their reports.
"The solicitors are shopping around. A patient is often encouraged to bypass his or her GP for a doctor of the solicitor's choosing," Dr GuΘret said.
Dr GuΘret, who is editor of the Irish Medical Directory, welcomed the Government's proposed Personal Injuries Assessment Board (PIAB), which he said would "blow the whistle" on the practice and reduce fees.
A spokesman for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment confirmed the interdepartmental implementation group, which is looking into how the PIAB should function, was expected to report by the end of this year.
The proposed board will examine claims for personal injuries, starting with work injuries and later with traffic accidents. The board will consist of a legal chairman, an insurance company representative and one of the social partners.
Mr Murphy said he did not believe solicitors were bullying doctors. "We've not received complaints about it and don't believe it happens. If it does, then it is extremely rare," he said.
Mr Murphy said the society's view on the PIAB was that it was biased against the claimant, who would not receive a fair assessment. This was because a member of the board would be an insurance company manager so was likely to be sympathetic to the defence.
"There is nobody there to represent the claimant's interest and we believe the exercise is to reduce compensation to victims," he said. The board was obligatory but the claimant had a right to appeal to the courts and this cost more in the end, he said.
Dr Reilly said he was not aware of any GPs being involved in amending reports.
On the PIAB, he said he would be in favour of anything that reduced the cost for patients. A situation where parents had to mortgage their house in order to take a case for their brain-damaged child had to be changed. "If the PIAB's intention is not to reduce compensation but to reduce fees, then that would be good," he said.