Criminalization of HIV transmission: Can doctors be liable for the onward transmission of HIV?

International Journal of STD and AIDS

Volumn 15, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 782-787

  Chalmers, James ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Confidentiality; Criminal law; HIV; Legal; Liability; Sexually transmitted diseases

Indexed keywords

COURT; CRIMINAL LAW; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; MEDICAL LIABILITY; NONHUMAN; OFFENDER; PATIENT CARE; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; VIRUS TRANSMISSION;

CONFIDENTIALITY; CRIME; CRIMINAL LAW; ENGLAND; HIV INFECTIONS; HUMANS; LIABILITY, LEGAL; PHYSICIANS;

EID: 10944263707     PISSN: 09564624     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/0956462042563729     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. R v Dica [2004] EWCA Crim 1103
2. Bunyan N. Refugee infected woman with HIV. Daily Telegraph 10 Jan 2004, 8
3. Ward D. 'Predator' who gave women HIV gets 10 years. The Guardian 15 May 2004, 12
4. Chalmers J. Sexually transmitted diseases and the criminal law. Juridical Review 2001:259-78
5. Ormerod DC. Criminalising HIV transmission-still no effective solutions. Common Law World Review 2001;30: 135-68
6. R v Clarence (1888) 22 QBD 23
7. Khaliq v HM Advocate 1984 JC 23
8. R v Ireland; R v Burstow [1998] AC 147
9. R v G [2004] 1 AC 1034. In Scots law, recklessness is defined as an 'utter disregard' for the consequences of one's actions: Cameron v Maguire 1999 JC 63
10. See reference 2
11. Chalmers J. The criminalisation of HIV transmission. J Med Ethics 2002;28:160-3
12. See reference 1, per Judge LJ at para 2
13. Boyfriend cleared of passing on illness. The Times 19 Jan 1998
14. Dyer C. HIV conviction is a landmark case. BBC News Online 14 Oct 2003. [www.news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3191312.stm]
15. See reference 4:266-7
16. See reference 1
17. See reference 4:271-3
18. See reference 1, per Judge LJ at para 11. See also reference 11:162
19. Hawkins DA. Oral sex and HIV transmission. Sex Transm Infect 2001;77:307-8
20. R v Edwards 2001 NSSC 80
21. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. Canadian criminal cases and HIV. 1999 [www.aidslaw.ca/Maincontent/issues/criminallaw/e-info-cla3.htm]. The figure in the text ignores cases listed in this 'info sheet' which would have been criminal regardless of any issue of HIV transmission or exposure (non-consensual assaults, stabbing, etc.) along with a charge of common nuisance brought against an HIV-positive man who donated blood. See also R v Edwards 2001 NSSC 80
22. Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. Canadian criminal cases and HIV. 1999 [www.aidslaw.ca/Maincontent/issues/criminallaw/e-info-cla3.htm]. The figure in the text ignores cases listed in this 'info sheet' which would have been criminal regardless of any issue of HIV transmission or exposure (non-consensual assaults, stabbing, etc.) along with a charge of common nuisance brought against an HIV-positive man who donated blood. See also R v Edwards 2001 NSSC 80
23. See, e.g. X v Y [1988] 2 All ER 648
24. W v Egdell [1990] Ch. 359
25. 583 A.2d 422 (Pa. 1990)
26. (1994) 112 DLR (4th) 257
27. 31 Cal.App.4th 1195 (1995). Cf. Santa Rosa Health Care Corporation v Garcia 964 S.W.2d 940 (Tex. 1998)
28. [1999] NSWSC 1082 (5 November 1999)
29. [1999] NSWSC 1082, per Bell J. at para 134
30. [1999] NSWSC 1082, per Bell J. at para 95
31. Grubb A. HIV transmission: doctor's liability to future partner. Medical Law Review 1997;5:250-6, 255-6
32. Reisner v Regents of the University of California 37 Cal.App.4th 1195, 1203 (1995) (Vogel, J.)
33. General Medical Council, Serious Communicable Diseases: Guidance to Doctors (October 1997) paras 18.a and 18.b [www.gmc-uk.org/standards/serious. htm]
34. Harvey & 1 Ors v PD [2004] NSWCA 97 (30 March 2004)
35. See Harvey & 1 Ors v PD [2004] NSWCA 97, per Santow JA at para 60
36. Haney & 1 Ors v PD [2004] NSWCA 97, per Santow JA at para 109. See also per Spigelman CJ at para 3. The third judge, while concurring with this analysis, was also prepared to hold that on the facts of the case. FH had tacitly consented at the initial consultation to the disclosure of his test results to FH. See Harvey, per Ipp JA at paras 163-180
37. Subject to the qualification that one member of the appeal court considered consent to disclosure to have been given on the facts: see reference 35
38. Public Health Act 1991 (NSW), section 17
39. Again subject to the qualification noted at reference 35
40. Jones M. Medical Negligence. 3rd edn. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003: para 2-090, suggests that such a duty should be recognised. See also Medical Defence Union. AIDS: Medico-Legal Advice, rev. edn. Cambridge: Medical Defence Union, 1989:8-10. For a contrary view, see reference 42
41. Jones M. Medical Negligence. 3rd edn. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003: para 2-090, suggests that such a duty should be recognised. See also Medical Defence Union. AIDS: Medico-Legal Advice, rev. edn. Cambridge: Medical Defence Union, 1989:8-10. For a contrary view, see reference 42
42. 551 P.2d 334 (1976)
43. 551 P.2d 334, 340 (Tobriner, J.)
44. Grubb A, Pearl D. Blood Testing, AIDS and DNA Profiling. Bristol: Family Law, 1990:48-55
45. This 'tripartite test' (foreseeability, proximity; and the 'fair just and reasonable' requirement) was identified by the House of Lords in Caparo Industries v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 in the context of a duty to prevent economic loss. It has since been applied to cases involving personal injury in both Scotland and England: X (Minors) v Bedfordshire CC [1995] 2 AC 633; Gibson v Orr 1999 SC 420
46. (General Medical Council, Confidentiality: Protecting and Providing Information (April 2004), para 27) [www.gmc-uk.org/standards/secret.htm]
47. [1999] Lloyd's Rep. Med. 351. See also Surrey CC v M (A Child) [2001] EWCA Civ 691
48. See Ashworth A. Principles of Criminal Law. 4th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003:47-9
49. Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789