A former White House doctor criticized the actions of Kevin O'Connor, the ex-White House physician to President Joe Biden, after he refused to respond to inquiries from a House Oversight Committee investigation earlier this week. Dr. O'Connor invoked the Fifth Amendment, answering only with his name during a closed-door session.
According to Fox News, the investigation examines allegations of Biden's aides concealing signs of his health decline, raising questions about potential ethical and confidentiality concerns.
Dr. O'Connor is under scrutiny after his brief meeting with the committee staff and panel Chair James Comer, a Republican from Kentucky, on Wednesday. Although the session was transcribed, O'Connor took the Fifth Amendment for all questions. Concerns from his legal team suggest the inquiry's broad scope could compromise doctor-patient confidentiality. The only exception to his silence was stating his name.
Representative Ronny Jackson, a Republican from Texas and fellow former White House physician, expressed skepticism over O'Connor's stance. In a conversation with Fox News Digital, Jackson noted: "Well, you can't do both," referring to O'Connor's balance between confidentiality and invoking the Fifth. O'Connor's legal team had previously attempted to delay the interview, stressing the importance of the confidentiality privilege.
Dr. Jackson elaborated on the complexity of the legal situation, stating that subpoenaing O'Connor negated the patient-doctor privilege. He added, "President Trump had waived presidential privilege," leaving O'Connor limited options besides pleading the Fifth.
Chairman Comer indicated that the investigation seeks clarity on allegations of actions by Biden's aides, with guidance from various medical professionals, including Jackson. Comer highlighted the need for extensive medical inquiries that the committee had prepared for the interview.
Jackson is concerned about potential involvement in concealing significant health information about President Biden. He remarked, "The cover-up could not have happened without the assistance and the help of his personal physician, Kevin O'Connor." Jackson suggested this contributed to O'Connor's choice to plead the Fifth Amendment.
Despite the speculations, O’Connor’s lawyers strongly denied any wrongdoing. They clarified the Fifth Amendment claim as a protective measure against what they saw as an invasive investigation. The attorneys emphasized their stance on protecting doctor-patient confidentiality.
This Committee has indicated to Dr. O'Connor and his attorneys that it does not intend to honor one of the most well-known privileges in our law - the physician patient privilege. Instead, the Committee has indicated that it will demand that Dr. O'Connor reveal, without any limitations, confidential information regarding his medical examinations, treatment, and care of President Biden.
Dr. Jackson stressed the need for answers about any cognitive tests or neurological assessments conducted during Biden's term. Many of those inquiries remained unattached following O'Connor's brief communication with the committee. Despite the confrontation, O’Connor’s legal team insists his reticence should not be misinterpreted as admitting guilt.
In a statement, O'Connor's attorneys addressed the scope of the Oversight Committee's questions as an unusual overreach that could breach the medical ethics surrounding confidentiality. They highlighted the severe repercussions of violating such ethical standards.
Fox News Digital contacted O’Connor’s legal representation for additional comments but received no new insights regarding the situation.
The event brings to light the ongoing tension between legal obligation and medical confidentiality standards. O'Connor remains steadfast in his decision to prioritize his patients' privacy, despite mounting legislative pressure.
In summary, the story revolves around the dilemmas faced by Dr. Kevin O'Connor as he chose to invoke the Fifth Amendment amidst a controversial probe. Legal, medical, and political aspects intertwine to form the backdrop against which he remains committed to maintaining doctor-patient confidentiality.
