Medical records and access thereto

Medicine and Law

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 499-517

  McQuoid Mason, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU NATAL   (South Africa)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CIVIL DEFENSE; CONFIDENTIALITY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EXPERT WITNESS; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN RIGHTS; INFORMED CONSENT; JURISPRUDENCE; LAW; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL RECORD; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; PATIENT MONITORING; SOCIAL ASPECT;

EID: 0030561832     PISSN: 07231393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (114)

1. Kolesar v Jeffries (1974) 59 DLR 3d 367 (Ont HC) 373.
2. George J. Annas, Leonard H. Glantz and Barbara F. Katz The Rights of Doctors, Nurses and Allied Health Professionals (1981) 154-5.
3. Dieeter Giesen International Medical Malpractice Law (1988) 417.
4. Giesen 417.
5. Ibid
6. The Hippocratic Oath: Medical Association of South Africa Guide to the Maintenance of Ethical Standards 3ed (1984) 26.
7. Declaration of Geneva adopted by the 2nd General Assembly of the World Medical Association, Geneva, Switzerland, September 1948; amended by the 22nd World Medical Assembly, Sydney, Australia, August 1968, and the 35th World Medical Assembly, Venice, Italy, October 1983 which states: "I will respect the secrets which are confided in me, even after the patient has died."
8. International Code of Medical Ethics adopted by the 3rd General Assembly of the World Medical Association, London, England, October 1949; amended by the 22nd World Medical Assembly, Sydney, Australia, 1968 and the 35th World Medical Assembly, Venice, Italy, October 1983 which states: "A physician shall preserve absolute confidentiality on all he knows about his patient, even after the patient has died."
9. South African Medical and Dental Council Rules of Conduct for Medical Practitioners and Dentists published in Government Notice R2278 of 3 December 1976, as amended by Government Notice 884 of 27 May 1977, Government Notice R395 of 27 February 1987, Government Notice R254 of 13 November 1987; Medical Association of South Africa Guide 17: "Rule 16: Professional Secrecy: Divulging verbally or in writing any information which ought not to be divulged regarding the ailment of the patient except with the express consent of the patient or, in the case of a minor, with consent of his parent or guardian, or in the case of a deceased patient, with the consent of his next-of-kin or the executor of his estate. Note: In a court of law professional secrecy may be contravened only under protest after direction from the presiding judicial officer."
10. J. Neethling Die Reg van Privaatheid (1976) 203, 253, 321; D.J. McQuoid-Mason, The Law of Privacy in South Africa (1978) 176, 193.
11. J. Neethling Die Reg van Privaatheid (1976) 203, 253, 321; D.J. McQuoid-Mason, The Law of Privacy in South Africa (1978) 176, 193.
12. Tothill v Foster 1925 TPD 857; Conway v Westwood 1936 NPD 245; contra SA Associated Newspapers Ltd v Schoeman 1962 (2) SA 613 (A) 617.
13. D.J. McQuoid-Mason and S.A. Strauss "The Medical Profession and Medical Practice" in W.A. Joubert (ed.) The Law of South Africa vol. 17 (1983) par 200.
14. Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 s189.
15. Rule 16 South African Medical and Dental Council Rules.
16. Parkes v Parkes 1916 CPD 702.
17. Botha v Botha 1972 (2) SA 559 (N).
18. Leon J. in Botha v Botha 560.
19. Davis v The Additional Magistrate Johannesburg 1989 (4) SA
20. (W) 303. See generally Jerold Taitz "The Breaching of Medical Confidentiality by Reason of an Order of Court" (1991) 10 Medicine and Law 43.
21. Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 s189.
22. Child Care Act 74 of 1983 s42. The same applies to dentists and nurses.
23. Health Act 63 of 1977 ss45 and 47.
24. Mental Health Act 18 of 1973 s13.
25. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993, s23. See below.
26. Constitutional Assembly Refined Working Draft 2ed (30 October 1995) s28. See below.
27. Section 13 (Interim Constitution); s9 (Working Draft).
28. Section 33(1) (Interim Constitution); s32(1) (Working Draft).
29. SA Strauss Doctor, Patient and the Law 3ed (1990) 17-18.
30. Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California 551 P 2d 430 (1976); Lance C. Egley "Defining the Tarasoff Duty" 1991 Journal of Psychiatry and Law 99.
31. Davis v Additional Magistrate. Johannesburg 303.
32. Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California 433. See generally Jerold Taitz "The Rule of Medical Confidentiality v The Moral Duty to Warn an Endangered Third Party" (1990) 78 SAMJ 29; Jerold Taitz "The Rule of Medical Confidentiality v The Moral Duty to Warn an Endangered Third Party : A Replication" (1990) 78 SAMJ 109.
33. Tarasoff v Regents of the University of California 433. See generally Jerold Taitz "The Rule of Medical Confidentiality v The Moral Duty to Warn an Endangered Third Party" (1990) 78 SAMJ 29; Jerold Taitz "The Rule of Medical Confidentiality v The Moral Duty to Warn an Endangered Third Party : A Replication" (1990) 78 SAMJ 109.
34. Privacy Protection Study Commission Personal Privacy in a Information Society (1977) 314; Annas, Glantz and Katz 183.
35. Strauss 112.
36. Strauss 107.
37. Act 3 of 1983 s13.
38. Strauss 108.
39. Manpower Training Act 56 of 1981 s17(b); Strauss 108.
40. Act 30 of 1941.
41. Act 30 of 1941 s 78(2); Strauss 108.
42. Samuel Freedman "Medical Privilege" (1954) 32 Canadian Bar Review 1, 19; B. Sneiderman, J.C. Irvine and P.H. Osborne Canadian Medical Law (1989) 187.
43. Samuel Freedman "Medical Privilege" (1954) 32 Canadian Bar Review 1, 19; B. Sneiderman, J.C. Irvine and P.H. Osborne Canadian Medical Law (1989) 187.
44. Rule 35.
45. Rule 35(1).
46. Rule 35(2).
47. Rule 36(1). See generally L. de v Van Winsen, J.P.G. Eksteen and A.C. Cilliers Herbstein and van Winsen: The Civil Practice of the Superior Courts in South Africa 3ed (1979) 419-421.
48. Rule 36(4).
49. Rule 36(5).
50. Rule 36(8).
51. Rule 36(9).
52. Coopers (SA) (Pty) Ltd v Deutsche Gesellschaft fur chadlings bekampfung MBH 1976 (3) SA 352 (A) 371-2; cf P.W.E. Baker, H.J. Erasmus and I.G. Farlam Jones and Buckle The Civil Practice of the Magistrates' Courts in South Africa: The Rules 7ed Vol 2 (1979) 251.
53. Rule 23 (discovery of documents) and Rule 24 (medical examinations etc). See generally Jones and Buckle 233-252.
54. Act 51 of 1977.
55. Section 105.
56. Davis v The Additional Magistrate Johannesburg 302-3; S v Matisonn 1981 (3) SA 302 (A) 313.
57. Davis v The Additional Magistrate Johannesburg 303.
58. Strauss 110.
59. Ex parte Dyant 1989 (4) SA 826 (Ck); cf Universal City Studios Ine v Network Video (Pty) Ltd 1986 (Z) SA 734 (A).
60. Strauss 110-11.
61. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993.
62. Strauss 110.
63. Annas, Glantz and Katz 157; Tom Christoffel Health and the Law : A Handbook for Health Professionals (1982) 332.
64. I. Kennedy and A. Grubb Medical Law : Text and Materials (1989) 530.
65. Strauss 113; Christoffel 332.
66. See below.
67. Christoffel 332-3.
68. Annas, Glantz and Katz 157.
69. Kennedy and Grubb 530-1.
70. Harris v Meyer 1911 AD 260; S v Van Tonder 1971 (1) SA 310 (T); S v Smuts 1972 (4) SA 358 (T).
71. L.H. Hoffmann and D. Zeffertt The South African Law of Evidence 4ed (1988) 448.
72. Ibid
73. Hoffmann and Zeffertt 448-9.
74. Hoffmann and Zeffertt 450.
75. Hoffman and Zeffertt 451.
76. R v Elijah 1963 (3) SA 86 (SR).
77. Prescription Act 68 of 1969 s11(d).
78. Prescription Act 68 of 1969 s12(3). See Strauss 113.
79. Strauss 113.
80. Medical Association of South Africa Guide 7.
81. Ibid.
82. Prescription Act 68 of 1969 s13(1).
83. Annas, Glantz and Katz 163-4.
84. Annas, Glantz and Katz 164.
85. Giesen 422.
86. Medical Association of South Africa Guide 6.
87. Giesen 422.
88. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals Accreditation Manual for Hospitals (1981) 84-8; cf Annas, Glantz and Katz 156.
89. Arthur F. Southwick The Law of Hospital and Health Care Administration (1978) 301; Christoffel 332.
90. Ibid
91. Annas, Glantz and Katz 162-3.
92. Annas, Glantz and Katz 156.
93. Annas, Glantz and Katz 157.
94. Ibid.
95. Giesen 423.
96. Giesen 424.
97. Strauss 111.
98. Ibid.
99. Strauss 111 note 5.
100. Strauss 111 note 5, 112 note 15. See also Giesen 424-430.
101. Giesen 427.
102. Lee v South West Thames Regional Health Authority [1985] 2 All ER 385 (CA) 389; Naylor v Preston Area Health Authority [1987] 2 All ER 353 (CA) 360; cf Kennedy and Grubb 533-4.
103. Data Protection Act 1984 s21; cf Kennedy and Grubb 534-538.
104. Comment "Not Very Healthy Data" The International Privacy Bulletin (July 1995) vol 3 no3 3.
105. Ibid.
106. Christoffel 333.
107. Annas, Glantz and Katz 159.
108. Annas, Glantz and Katz 160-1.
109. Annas, Glantz and Katz 161.
110. Annas, Glantz and Katz 162.
111. Medical Association of South Africa Guide 7.
112. See generally Anton De Klerk "Should a Patient have Access to his Medical Records?" (1989) 8 Medicine and Law 475.
113. Strauss 116-7 where he points out that the patient retained record card system has serious problems because of: (a) the danger of loss or damage to the records; (b) the danger that the records will not be available should a medical practitioner be faced with a malpractice or unethical behaviour complaint by a patient; (c) the danger that the physician will not be able to remember the exact nature of the examination or treatment rendered to the patient and cannot back it up with documentary evidence; (d) the danger that it will be impossible for practitioners to satisfy the contemporaneous element when submitting documentary evidence to court; and, (e) the danger of possible fraudulent entries in the records by patients or others at their request.
114. Strauss 115.