DOCTORS' SECRETS

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 129, 3 June 1922, Page 7

DOCTORS' SECRETS

PRIVILEGE FOR THE MEDICAL WITNESS

(By theJMedical' Correspondent of tho London Times, of 3rd March.) An interesting debate was concluded on Tuesday night, the- subject being how far privilege ought to bo extended to the medical witness whoa ho. is required to disclose in his evidence information obtained in thfi course of feis professional This is a liaokneyed question, and has been debated from many aspe'ets for maiiy years, but tho times m which we live have given new colours to the old picture. It has often been discussed, because such a number of illustrative cmos can be quoted (or invented) in which, ,first, tho medical claim for secrecy is shown to be against public policy, and, secondly, tho compulsion of the medical witness to make revelations is found to be 'equally not for the public good The difficulty is to\ deviso any general principle which will meet the average number of these cases, leaving;1 the consensus, of public opinion, the ruling of judges, and tho inspirations of decency to meet epecial or unusual situations. ~ . / / A MEASURE OF PRIVILEGE DEMANDED. Much play has been made by those who ask for fcompleto privilage in the matter of medical evidence by comparisons between the respective positions of the lawyer, the priest, and the doctor, but such comparisons lead nowhere, as the claims for privilege by the three professions are not bas-ed on analogous grounds. The position of the medical man at the present moment is that he enjoys no privilege whatever. He can be ordered, at tho peril in which .•'lofiancs places him, to reply to.any questions sanctioned by a Judge, and this position is rendered anomalous because Judgss and counsel rogard the claims ot tho medical : man for privilege in widely Varying maitmors. The plea at the bottom of Lord Dawson's address, with which the debate at tho 'Medico-Legal Society's meeting opened, was for. a measure'of privilege, so that the mcdicSl man should know when and where he has a right to refuse to reply, or whether this refusal will be made upon his own resppnsibility. It was oiddent from" the discussion, in which such wellknown men of affairs and accomplishment as Lord Justice Atkin (who presided), Sir William Collins, Dr. B. H. Spilsbury (who is often the most prominent medical witness in the criminal trials of to-day), Dr. Langdon Down (the President of tho Ethical Committee of the British' Medical Association), Lord Russell, and Lord Riddell topic part, that tho feeling of the meeting was in favour of Lord Dawson's arguments, tat that many practical difficulties' lay ahead of tha granting of any privilege to medical men by an Act of Parliament. J •■/■ Thoso difficulties should form no bar whatever to the early framing of legislation _to meet a situation which hot only medical men but tho public find, to say; the least of it, embarrassing. Tho public considers that medical confidences should. bc> kept inviolate, ,and respect for such confidences ; s ingrained in tho medical profession. This' feeling cannot be overruled by instances, real or imaginary, where the course of justice may be,~or has been, impeded by the silence of the doctor. No absurd claim was put forward -by Lord Dawson, or would receive any support from tho medical profession, for privilege which would\mean legalisation of the concealment of crime. THE CASK FOR A CONFERENCE.

The compulsion recently of a medical man in a Court of Law to give information which ho had obtained during his work at a venereal clinic —and obtained it under the promise from Government that it should bo considered absolutely private—established in the minda of all thinking people the view that some measure of privilege ought to be accoixled to the! medical witness. It remains to find what this measure should be, and how h can be defined.

Lord Dawßon suggested a rdund-tablp conference between) representative medical men aud representative lawyers to clear up the preliminary difficulties, and the suggestion is a, very sound one. Such a conference would eliminate from conpideration special instanaes, and would direct attention to one thing, and one thing; only—public policy •: ,