Until I received the reply below (posted to GP-UK, not private e-mail), I had
actually thought that the presence of lawyers specialising in medicolegal cases
would enhance the banter on GP-UK. Now I am not so sure at all. I wonder if
their presence may cause serious limitation of genuine dialogue....
I enclose the full original conundrum posed by me, and the reply from Graham
Ross is interjected by me.
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> Dear Dr Miles
> I ought to first of all advise you that I am a lawyer with an associated
> practice in St Helens that is very prominent in criminal work (J Keith
> Park & Co).
Are you a member of J Keith Park & Co?
If so, have you been in contact with the St Helens branch regarding my message?
If not, have you contacted J Keith Park?
> I say this as it may well be that my colleagues have today
> been instructed in this very case, if, as I assume, it is last night's
> Anfield vicarage murder (St Helens suspect arrested after 'tip off').
You are making assumptions which I will neither answer or refute, in view of
the above comments, but I am alarmed at how readily you have leapt to those
conclusions on such little information...
> I do not know what information it is that you wish to impart, but
> clearly it would be a dangerous practice.
Dangerous for whom? The public? Me? or Your client?
> My concern would be that incorrect information, eg a psychiatrist's incorrect
> assessment of a violent and unbalanced mental state, entered for purely
> health diagnostic reasons, could be misused as evidence to convict an
> otherwise innocent man.
I would have thought that a professional opinion entered in a patient's medical
records by a qualified consultant psychiatrist was usually a very valid opinion
in assessing someone's nature. Pardon me for being so naive.....
> If you believe you have something of importance in identifying guilt,
> then you perhaps ought to indicate that fact alone, without saying what
> it is, to the police,
Possibly...
> to the suspect/his solicitors
Are you seriously suggesting that someone who believes that he has information
regarding a patient who has committed a serious crime e.g. murder, rape, should
attempt to contact the patient and his lawyer? So that the "innocent man" can
come after us to get rid of the evidence?
> to any other doctor whose opinion is contained in those records
And should I be contacting everyone else in the patient's notes (whose writing
I cannot read) as well?
> and then leave it to the lawyers and the police to sort out by perhaps some
> court order.
>
> But I do sympathise with any doctor found in this predicament.The
> principle of confidentiality however should not be set aside in reaction
> to the horror of the murder.
>
> Graham Ross
> ********************
IMPORTANT BIT
It has been suggested elsewhere that information on GP-UK should not be
disclosed elsewhere without the consent of the originator of the message.
I suspect that Graham Ross would have no compunction in using information on
GP-UK to institute legal proceedings or investigations against a member of
GP-UK. Will he give us a guarantee that he will not do so?
Many of the topics aired on GP-UK at are the cutting edge of medicine, where
there may not be (currently) right or wrong answers. If lawyers are waiting in
the wings to "attack" when someone steps (unwittingly) a little over the edge,
then I would also consider leaving this list (see previous messages)
I was very alarmed at how a general message posted by myself was replied to by
Graham Ross with such specific details and "advice", which might for all we
know be specifically designed to protect a client of his firm. We have always
kept discussion at a more general level, never talking about named patients
(although often talking about named Trusts :-))
You will see from my original posting below that I originally intended to post
my thoughts on the conundrum in a day or two. I now feel that I _cannot_ do
this, in case this sparks off legal repercussions (and, Graham Ross, this is in
no way an admission/acknowledgement/confirmation/refutation or anything similar
that you are in any way right in your assumptions above). So, legitimate
discussion of ethical issues has been curtailed by the presence of alawyer here
on GP-UK.
Dr Laurie Miles
All parts of this message not attributed to Graham Ross are (Copyright) 1996 Dr
Laurence Miles, and are not to be reproduced on any forum or medium other than
GP-UK without the express permission of the author, Dr Laurence Miles
**************
> Dr Laurence Miles wrote:
> >
> > What do GP-UKers think is the "right answer to this?
> >
> > You hear on the radio that an ex-patient of yours is wanted and on the
> > run for murder. You know that you have very detailed computer records on
> > him, up to the time that he left your list, which might be of assistance
> > to the police.
> >
> > Do you ring the police and tell them his confidential past history?
> >
> > I'll post my answer in a day or two....
> >
> > Dr Laurence Miles
> >
> > GP, St Helens
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|