Health care confidentiality: Recent legal developments in Canada and Australia

Health Care Analysis

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 157-167

  Ford, Susanna ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CANADA; CONFIDENTIALITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LAW ENFORCEMENT; LEGAL APPROACH; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL RECORD; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; RAPE; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

LEGAL APPROACH; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP;

AUSTRALIA; CANADA; CONFIDENTIALITY; DISCLOSURE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNATIONALITY; LAW ENFORCEMENT; MEDICAL RECORDS; RAPE; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

EID: 0030133272     PISSN: 10653058     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1042(199605)4:2<157::aid-hca178>3.0.co;2-e     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. This includes the Hippocratic Oath itself, which reads (in a typical translation) ′ All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or outside of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread about, I will keep secret and will never reveal...'.
2. Article 17 of the ICCPR enshrines this right. The ICCPR was ratified by Australia in 1980, and the First Optional Protocol was signed in 1991.
3. W v Egdell [1990] 1 All ER 835.
4. See also, Royal Melbourne Hospital v Mathews, unreported, Supreme Court of Victoria, 9 December 1992, Australian Health and Medical Reporter (1991) para 27-770.42. The Assistant Director of Medical Services refused to give to police the medical records of a person who had attended the outpatients department and who was charged with knowingly infecting another person with HIV. It was held that a member of the health service is bound to hand over patient records to police who have a valid warrant for them, and would not be breaching patient confidentiality.
5. For the position in the United States, see Tarasoff v Regents of University of California (1976) 131 Cal Rptr 14 (Cal SC).
6. For example, see s64 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1989 (Vic) which sets out those who must report suspected cases of child abuse, including medical practitioners, nurses, psychologists, school teachers, social workers and welfare workers.
7. In Victoria, Tasmania and the Northern Territory a limited privilege is conferred on communications made to doctors. See s28(2) Evidence Act 1958 (Vic); s96(2) of the Evidence Act 1910 (Tas) and s 12(2) of the Evidence Act 1939 (NT).
8. See for example, Health Administration Act 1982 (NSW); Health Services Act 1988 (Vie); South Australian Health Commission Act 1976 (SA); Health Services (Conciliation and Review) Act 1987 (Tas). The Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) provides that all Commonwealth officers have an obligation to keep records confidential.
9. Publick, C. (NSW Privacy Commissioner) (1996). Keeping health private. Sydney Morning Herald, 11 January.
10. Slavutych v Baker (1975) 38 CRNS 206. See also Wigmore, J. (1961). Evidence Trials at Common Law, McNaughton, 2191.
11. Baker v Campbell (1983) 153 CLR 52 (High Court of Australia). The privilege has existed for over 400 years in English law: Berd v Lovelace (1577) 21 ER 33.
12. R v Hennessey (1978) 68 Cr App Rep 419 (Court of Appeal); Attorney-General v Mulholland (1963) 1 AU ER 767 per Lord Denning MR.
13. Commonwealth of Australia v Northern Lands Council (1993) 112 ALR 409 (High Court of Australia).