PROFESSIONAL SECRECY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18197, 16 September 1922, Page 9

PROFESSIONAL SECRECY

DOCTORS AND PATIENTS.

CONFIDENCE HELD SACRED. i DECISION OF THE B.M.A. [from ottb owx correspondent.] LONDON. July 27. At the first session of the British Medical Association at Glasgow the subject of " Professional Secrets" -was thoroughly and exhaustively debated, and a policy was laid down as to future action in support of, doctors who refuse to divulge in the witness-box the confidences communicated to them by their patients in the privacy of their consulting rooms. As chairman of the Central Ethical Committee, Dr. R. Langdon Down (Hampton Wick) moved : That it be the policy of the association to support in every way possible any member of the British Medical Association within the United Kingdom who, in the opinion of the council, or the Central Ethical Committee acting on behalf of the council, after due' consideration of the circumstances, is deemed to have been justified in refusing to disclose any information he may have obtained in the exercise of his professional duties.

Dr. Down explained that this recommendation was in substitution for last year's resolution .at .Newcastle, which he now asked the representative body to rescind. That resolution was : That the association use all its power to support a member of the association who refuses to divulge without the patient's consent information obtained in the exercise of his professional duties, except where it is already provided by Act of Parliament that he must do so. " Tie Utmost Limit." . The : policy now recommended represented the utmost limit to which the association ought to pledge itself in advance before knowing the actual circumstances of a particular case. It reserved to the council the right to decide whether refusal to divulge information, was Justified or not. Dr. Down intimated that the support:' which the council proposed to give to any doctor whose refusal to tsll was deemed justifiable would take the following form :—(a) Arrangements to be made by the local division of the association for the carrying on of such doctor'a practice;, (b) the organisation of public opinion through the press, Houses of Parliament, etc.; (c) legal advice to be provided-by the association. "Public opinion in this matter is generally believed to be behind the council ami against the Courte," he said. "It believes ?n medical secrecy as a necessary condition of medical confidence, and it wisely holds that, its violation would open the door to a thousand abuses, while the harm done by its observance is very rare and negligible.*' Dr. McQregor Robertson (Glasgow) said that either the association had to maintain that the medical profession had a privilege similar to the privilege of solicitors and clergymen, or it could do ing. Ho protested that the solution proposed by the council was ah evasion *of a clear, well-defined issue, as laid down in last . year's resolution. What would happen if a medical man in the witness-box declined to answer a question on the ground of the confidence placed in. him in the consulting room ? He might be committed for contempt of Court and beld in prison until ho was considered to have; "purged his offence." The council or the Central Ethical Committee would then be called upon to consider the case. i Three months might elapse before it'was decided to "support" the maiu Meantime he was languishing in prison. He quoted a case in .which a Court had held that; a clergyman was not required to divulge information obtained in confidential communication from the penitent. The same relationship should be established between the medical man and the patient. ,"'.'.■ A Sacred Duty. ; Dr. J. Stewart (Lambeth) held that the medical profession had always regarded secrecy as. a sacred duty, and they should ' set themselves, against any idea getting abroad that there was going •W. be any relaxation of the conditions that so far had existed; between., them, and "their patients. * If people got the idea that they should tell their doctors as little as possible the doctors would not have the means of understanding and of being of use to half the cases the)' attended. Women would be the greatest sufferers.' DrJ E. (London) said that the Lord Chancellor had issued a memorandum contending that no special provilege existed in the. matter, and that the law must stand.' "If that is the policy of the Cabinet," declared Dr. Thomas, "we must stand on bur own feet." '.'*"' , By. an; overwhelming majority, last year's resolution was rescinded and the recommendation adopted. The discussion continued on the question of securing "special consideration" from the Courts, and resulted in the passing of a further recommendation by the council, prefixed by the words of an amendment from the Kensington division, the combined resolution reading: That as;-', in the opinion of this meeting, it is an essential principle of medical conduct that information obtained in connection with the treatment of patients should not be divulged without the 'consent of the patient concerned, the proper preservation of professional secrecy necessitates a measure of special consideration being recognised for medical witnesses in Courts of law above and beyond what is accorded to /the ordinary witness." On the question being rained as to what was to be the procedure in the cass of the certification of lunatics, .the following words were added to the foregoing re3o-: lution: "Save to prevent girave injury or injustice to the State, the patient, or other members of the community.'* Dr. E. B. Turner said that when he had refused to divulge confidential information in the witness-box tine question had not been pressed.' If'they all determined to stick to their guns one or two of them might have to sample "skilly," but there.would nqt bo many more. Only seven members voted against the resolution. '•". . . , : ■„■■