In Australia most lawyers would advise their clients against bringing a civil action unless the evidence was quite obviously against the doctor.
The information a doctor gains from his patients is confidential and he may not breach that trust by revealing that information to any third party.
If he does the patient may invoke the law and seek damages. However, in a court of law, the doctor’s duty is to the law and not to his patient.
He may be directed to reveal that information and he cannot claim privilege.
If he does so, preferring not to reveal the information he has, then he is not above the law and the judge may hold the doctor in contempt of court. If so, a fine or imprisonment may be imposed.
In most cases where there may be a clash of interests, good sense and conciliation will solve most difficulties.
When it fails to do so, the clash is highlighted to the detriment of both professions.
Doctors think like doctors and lawyers think like lawyers, but then don’t all of us consider our own job and our own way of carrying it out, important?
The law is for guidance of wise men. I would like to think that no one profession has a greater claim to wisdom than the other.
*481/71/1*
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.