Court says physicians should warn, but not necessarily testify

Article

Protecting the confidentiality of patients isn't an absolute duty: When physicians believe that a patient could harm another, they should report it to proper authorities or warn the intended target. But they shouldn't testify in the patient's trial. At least that's the opinion of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in California.

According to American Medical News (9/15/03), the federal appeals court reasoned that "a physician testifying against a patient in a courtroom would have a far more damaging impact on the physician-patient relationship than a physician going to authorities to report information." Specifically, the court noted that a patient who is convicted based in part on the testimony of his or her physician would certainly be less trustful of medical professionals and, in turn, would be more reluctant to seek further treatment for her condition.

Recent Videos
Self-collection and extended genotyping advance cervical cancer screening | Image Credit: linkedin.com.
New trends in cervical cancer screening: Self-collection and barriers to adherence | Image Credit: linkedin.com.
Kameelah Phillips, MD, FACOG, NCMP, is featured in this series.
Kameelah Phillips, MD, FACOG, NCMP, is featured in this series.
HPV self-collection: Benefits, limitations, and future implications | Image Credit: forhers.com
Improving pediatric HPV vaccination rates: Early initiation and addressing disparities | Image Credit: blog.nemours.org.
New cervical cancer screening guidelines: What practitioners needs to know | Image Credit: forhers.com
COVID-19 Therapy Roundtable: Focusing on inpatient care
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.