DOCTORS MUST TELL

Evening Star, Issue 19663, 16 September 1927, Page 10

DOCTORS MUST TELL

CONFIDENCE OF PATIENTS NO SECRECY IH COURT The medical fads, for the production of which Mr Justice JPCardie adjourned n, case at tho Birmingham Assizes a few weeks ago, and warned a witness—a doctor—that it necessary tho whole of tho hospital stall would be called before ihe court, were forthcoming at the next sitting. Before the documents were put in tho judge delivered a formal judgment on the relation of doctors and the law in such mailers. Tho case was a. divorce petition, and it was sought to establish a medical fact concerning tho respondent. When tho hearing was resumed, Mr B. T. Rose, consulting surgeon at the hospital, repeated tho prolcsf, previously made by Dr Assindcr against being compelled to produce conliclontial documents, saying I hat it was against the traditions of the profession. Mr Justice Id‘Cardie asked Mr H. Laden, counsel for tho petitioner, if he had considered whether or not the doctor was bound to . disclose to tho court information obtained when acting confidentially in tho special treatment of a particular complaint.

Mr Eadcn replied that he had considered the point, and lie suggested that no distinction could be. drawn between treatment of that kind and (he treatment of au ordinary patient.

The Judge (to Mr Rose) Do you produce the documents?

Mr Rose; I produce 'the documents only under compulsion, One document is the patient’s ease sheet. I regard that as my property, but tho oilier document which f have ,is tho property neither of myself nor of any of the people working at the hospital. It is tho properly either of the Ministry of Health or of tho hospital. I have it here. J have not consulted it at all. ft is sealed? just as £ received it from tho hospital authorities. Mr Eadcn said there w;us certain protection and privilege appertaining to lawyers, but in spite of the regulations of July, 1916, governing the treatment of certain diseases issued bv the then Local Government Board to local authorities, ho submitted that there, was no such privilege attaching cither to the clergy or Hie medical profession.

.Mr Justice -M'Cardie said while ho fully appreciated tho grounds of Dr Assindcr's protest he told him that if tho law was as ho deemed it to be bo should enforce the powers of tho law without hesitation. Similarly, Mr Rose had stated that to break tho confidence imposed upon him would be contrary to the high duty of secrecy resting upon medical men. “I appreciate the protest, Mr Rot.-,” the Judge continued, "but I am making my observations in the form of a judgment, because I realise tho importance of the point which now arises, not only to tho whole of tho medical profession in this country, but to all interested in tho law of England.”

The medical profession normally, the Judge proceeded, wa K s under tho duty of keeping inviolate the secret knowledge that they might gain from treating their patients. In his view that normal duty and the observance of it was essential to tho dignity, the honor, and tho efficiency of the profession. Ho would go further, and say that in his view if a medical man without lawful excuse broke tho duty of confidence which rested upon him he would be liable to a civil action for damages. It was well id remember that in more than ono Continental country the doctor who broke that confidence without lawful excuse was guilty of a criminal offence. But, although a doctor was bound to preserve Id’s patients’ secrets inviolate, yet, when in a court of law, a doctor had no privilege .similar to that held by a solicitor or other legal adviser. Physicians, surgeons, and medical men generally were not privileged from compulsory disclosures of communications however confidential. In tho present case there was tho further question whether the medical men occupied an unusual position of privilege because (hey were acting in a department under tho control of (lie Ministry of Health through tho local Health Committee. Regulations issued in IPlfi by tho Local Government Board —which was the predecessor of tho Ministry of Health —to local authorities contained an article, to tho effect that all information obtained in regard to any person treated under a scheme approved in nursuan o of tho article should bo regarded as confidential. But there was nothing in the regulations which saved a doctor from (he obligation of disclosure if ordered io do so by tho court.

Mr Rose produced the documents required.