The Law and Medical MenRogers, R. Vashon (Robert Vashon)
History
The Law and Medical Men
Rogers, R. Vashon (Robert Vashon)
Medical laws and legislation
4. Where competent medical aid can be had, the application of violent
remedies by an ignorant person, though with the best motives, involves
him in criminal responsibility.
5. Express malice, or an intent to commit a personal or social wrong,
makes the practitioner criminally responsible in all cases of mischief.
These well known writers say, that according to Caspar and Böcker, in
the treatment of internal diseases, the physician can never be held
guilty of criminal carelessness for failing to use any particular
remedy, since there is never any remedy upon which all authorities are
agreed, and since it is always possible the patient may recover without
the use of such remedy [224].
|93|
CHAPTER VII.
PROFESSIONAL EVIDENCE.
It was decided nearly one hundred years ago, in the Duchess of
Kingston’s case, that a medical man has no privilege to avoid giving in
evidence any statement made to him by a patient, but that he is bound
to disclose, when called upon to do so in a court of justice, every
communication, however private and confidential, which has been made to
him by a patient while attending him in a professional capacity [225].
This has often been deemed a grievance by medical men, and considered
a compulsory breach of professional ethics; for the relations between
patient and physician, being necessarily of a confidential character,
communications made to a physician are looked upon, by the profession,
as confessions which should be kept religiously locked in the brain of
the physician. Lord Mansfield said, “If a medical man was voluntarily
to reveal those secrets, to be sure he would be guilty of a breach of
honour and of great indiscretion, but to give that information which by
the law of the land he is bound to do will never be imputed to him as
any indiscretion whatever” [226].
A French writer says, the tribunals neither ought, nor have they the
power, to exact from a physician the revelation of a secret confided to
him because of his office; at all events, he may and ought to refuse
to tell. Religion, |94| probity, nay, the rights of society, make
this the law. Still more are we bound to secrecy when not compelled
to disclose. Upon this point casuists and jurisconsults are of one
opinion [227].
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account