more_vert
When using humour on social media, don’t make patients the punchline, writes Dr Maria Li.
Social media is not a new concept for doctors. More of us than ever are active online, posting from the frontlines of care. Most of us mean well. But sometimes, even seemingly harmless content creation can chip away at our credibility.
Ahpra’s social media guidelines aren’t prescriptive, but their message is clear: online behaviour is regulated the same way as in-clinic behaviour. How we present ourselves on social media can have real-world impact — on us individually, and on the reputation of the profession. Even when there is no regulatory consequence, our reputation is always on the line.
That’s why it’s important to understand not just the rules, but the principles of responsible social media engagement.
This is the fourth article in my series exploring social media use for doctors. If you haven’t read parts 1, 2 or 3, I recommend going back to lay the groundwork.
Case study: Ethan*
Ethan was an emergency registrar who built a following on TikTok by posting humorous videos about hospital life. Aimed at fellow doctors, many involved him dressing up as patients and acting out exaggerated stereotypes: the demanding patient, the longwinded patient, the one with a self-inflicted injury, to name a few.
Colleagues found the videos relatable. Comments poured in:
“This gives me the s*#ts too!”
“OMG, I can’t stand those patients.”
Ethan believed his content was harmless — it was satire, and the scenarios were de-identified. But not everyone agreed.
A member of the public lodged a formal complaint with Ahpra, describing the content as demeaning. The regulator found the tone inconsistent with professional standards and took disciplinary action.
“Just a joke”
Few things bond clinicians like the shared frustrations of practice. And in trying to make light of those moments, some doctors occasionally slip into posts that poke fun at patient behaviours — usually pitched as an “inside joke” for peers.
The catch? Social media rewards what performs, not what’s professional. When snarky content gains traction, the algorithm pushes it further. Likes, shares and comments give us instant validation, while the algorithm feeds us more of the same type of content, subtly normalising it over time.
It’s easy to see how a one-off joke meant for colleagues can quietly turn into a pattern of public ridicule.
Case study: Hayley*
Hayley was a doctor who hosted a popular medical podcast. In a recent episode, she and her co-host aired a segment titled “Crazy questions patients ask,” swapping stories and laughing over common frustrations. At the time, it felt light-hearted.
But a few weeks later, the show’s sponsor pulled their funding. A patient advocacy group had raised concerns, calling the segment mean-spirited and insensitive to the experiences of vulnerable patients. The sponsor took the feedback seriously and walked away from the podcast.
Our audience is not always who we think it is
We sometimes assume that if content is aimed at colleagues, then everyone else will simply scroll past. But that’s not how social media works.
As I’ve said before, social media might feel intimate, but it’s a public stage with a wide audience and a permanent record. You can’t control who sees your content. Even if you’re speaking to peers, patients and employers are almost certainly watching — and forming their own impressions.
The power imbalance
Don’t get me wrong, doctors are allowed to have a sense of humour online. But there’s a distinction between laughing with our peers about shared experiences, and laughing at the people we look after.
There’s an inherent power imbalance between doctors and patients. And when we abuse that for laughs, we risk:
- undermining our own reputation;
- damaging trust in the profession; and
- discouraging patients from seeking care.
How would you feel if your child’s teacher made posts that mocked their students? The same dynamic applies to us and our patients, and it matters just as much.
Before you publish
Take a moment to check in with yourself:
- Would I be comfortable if my patients saw this?
- Would I feel confident if my doctor spoke this way about me?
If something feels off — even if you can’t quite name why — pause and:
- “vibe-check” it with a colleague;
- run it past your medical defence organisation;
- tweak it; or
- delete it.
That’s not self-censorship. That’s professional judgement in action.
Final thoughts
Social media may feel informal, but it’s more visible and permanent than we realise. Our professional obligations don’t end when we take off our scrubs and pick up our phone — they follow us into every space where we represent ourselves as doctors.
Patient care is not entertainment. And if we treat it as such, we risk losing something far more valuable than followers: our reputation.
Stay tuned for future articles in this series.
*Ethan and Hayley are fictional, based on real examples of online behaviour.
Dr Maria Li is a general practitioner, a member of the World Health Organization’s Fides network of social media health care influencers, the host and producer of The Safe Practice Podcast, and co-host of The Good GP podcast.
The statements or opinions expressed in this article reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy of the AMA, the MJA or InSight+ unless so stated.
Subscribe to the free InSight+ weekly newsletter here. It is available to all readers, not just registered medical practitioners.
If you would like to submit an article for consideration, send a Word version to mjainsight-editor@ampco.com.au.
What of medical team group chats or WhatsUp groups? Where are the administrative guidelines for these? APHRA guidelines? Protections from bullying, minimum information sharing, team member exclusion? Not to mention inclusion in patient records? Disclosure to patients in cases of harms? This is long overdue.
Which is why books like “You Called an Ambulance for What?” while very good read, may attract different sort of attention and nuisance which may subject the writer to unnecessary investigation by the AHPRA no matter how obviously frivolous the complaint/notification can be
Is Rob Richardson serious? Patients are people too, and their perceptions and experience should be part of the focus of doctors. Professional competence includes emotional competence. Mocking, or appearing to mock, those you care for is not OK. It diminishes confidence in the profession and may hurt individual patients. Being respectful to patients at all times, whether on social media or otherwise, is an element of professionalism. The regulator and sponsor in these examples did exactly what they should do.
this is the exact opposite of how it should be. Doctors are people first and its competence not sitting on a phony pedestal that counts
A great series so far from Dr Marina Li, although I’m alarmed doctors need to be told this, to even think about posting this type of content betrays how you really think about people in general. Of course all doctors have experience with the various types of “difficult patient” and I’m sure we’ve all shared a private eye roll or three at times, but at the end of the day these are humans in some sort of distress seeking our help, and they deserve our professionalism and compassion.