Medical confidentiality Flashcards
What did the case of Duncan say
Here it stated that the relationship between the doctor and the patient is a fiduciary relaionship in that there needs to be trust built in order for the patient to disclose information. The doctor has an ethical obligation to maintain strict confidentiality.
What did the case of Duncan say
Here it stated that the relationship between the doctor and the patient is a fiduciary relaionship in that there needs to be trust built in order for the patient to disclose information. The doctor has an ethical obligation to maintain strict confidentiality.
What happened in the Naomi Campbell case?
In this case campbell was suing the mirror for breach of confidentiality as the mirror was taking her pictures while attending counselling linked to drug and addiction counselling. it was taking on public grounds and the infromration was known to public and so this could not constitute a breach of confidentiality due to public property. This is a consequentialist view also because the courts weigh the publics favour of disclosure vs the publics favour of confidentiality. In this case because she was public figure, she had to suffer consequences.
when does a duty of confidence arise?
A duty of confidence arises whenever the party subject to the duty is in the situation where he knows or ought to know that that information told to him should not be disclosed.
What happend in COCO V AN CLARK
Here it was said that public information or public property ie made known to the public is not a breach of confidence, the information said by the individual must constitute an obligation of confidence, where the recipient knows that of he releases this information it would be of detriment to the other party.
What happend in AG V Guardian
You dont need a contract circumstances will do just fine
In this case held when a duty of confidence arises and stated that a duty of confidence arises when the individual has been subject to that information and he reasonably believes that the information told to him was confidential and he is precluded from disclosing this information to another party.
What happend in R v Dept of health
Here, tried to get a hold of how the pharmacy prescibed mediction to patients and in doing so needed to obtain informaton from patients however this information would be anonymous. the trial judge focused on detriment from coocv clarke and stated that where the patients infromation is anonymous then this does not breach their privacy or invade it therefore it is not a breach of confidential information.the court of appeal went on to say that it is the question whether or not the defendants conscience had been affected. that is the question, also went on to say that patients do not have a proprety right or control s to what their information is actually being used for as long as there is anonoymous then this is not a breach of confidential information
what happend in the case of L-Admin Singapore
In this case they held that an obligation of a duty of confidence also arises where a third party has accessed the patients information without the consent of the patient. the question here and the burden of proof is on the defendant to show that his concious was unaffected.
What does the SMC medical code say
That the doctors must get the consent of their patients for specific disclosure and that if patients want to prohibit doctor from disclosing information then they can however the doctor must tell the implications if this were to happen ie from preventing family members and loved ones from knowing.
What happend in the X V Y case
In this case the newspaper wanted to publish on singapore that doctors had HIV and wanted the public patients to know as it can result in complications and risk during treatment. Doctotrs felt embarrased but also need to protect the public.
What about when patients die?
There is an obligation for doctors to maintain strict confidentiality even after the patient dies. Unless executors or next of kin needs this information and it is reasonably beleived that it doesnt go against the patients wishes or where it is needed for medical reasearch.
What happend in the spycatcher case?
In this case there was an unathorised disclosure of governmental information published by memoirs because they were not paid well in their careers. they were held liable.
What if the breach was trivial?
The breach cannot be trivial e.g you went to golf and left the patient papers on your desk and you dont know who saw them the breach has to be substantial.
what happened in SMC V SOO SEU CHIANG
In this case,, ( Normally need patient consent to disclose information to third party). Over the phone brother faked to be husband and lied that it was for legal proceedings rather needed patient infromation for personal reaosons in court. Patient sued doctor for professional misconduct and breach of confidentiality. Not held liable- doctor had a basis to breach ocnfidentialty without her consent this is because she was suicidal and self harming, 2 the doctor has taken reaosnable steps to identify the caller correctly.
Do doctors have a duty to disclose to third parties?
Yes there needs to be consent to do this. doctors have a duty to dislcose to third parties however sometimes the patients wishes may triumph third party wishes due to the health of the patient. for e.g if the patient was suicidal or has a very bad mental health and tells the doctor not to dislcose this information to the family members, then he may put the patients interest over the family members interest. If family wishes to tell doctors to withold information from the patients then they need to prove that if this information were to be told, the patient will not handle the information in a calm way.
