The Denver Posteditorial
Patient records are private
Friday, April 23, 2004 -
By ruling that the medical records of the woman accusing Kobe Bryant of rape can't be used as evidence, Eagle County District Judge Terry Ruckriegle upheld the long-standing legal principle that the doctor-patient relationship is privileged.
The Eagle County jurist held that the woman didn't waive the physician-patient privilege because she had talked in a general way with friends and family about some aspects of her mental health and possible treatment. Ruckriegle's ruling has been characterized as a setback for the basketball star's defense, which has attacked the woman's credibility, alleging that reported previous suicide attempts and use of anti-psychotic medication raised doubts about whether she was, in fact, sexually assaulted on June 30, 2003, at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera in Edwards. The defense claims the woman accused Bryant because of a psychological disorder. Ruckriegle's action, however, doesn't mean that other judges in other criminal prosecutions can't address such issues on a case-by-case basis. "You have to look at every case individually, but this is an important case," said Karen Steinhauser, a former prosecutor and now a University of Denver law professor, "because the judge is essentially saying that just because a person talks to friends and family about things that are privileged, things that you talk to doctor about getting treatment for, that doesn't mean you waive your privilege." Legal privilege exists because "society has said there are certain relationships that we have that go beyond the whole adversarial truth-seeking process, and this is one of them," Steinhauser explained. A patient has to be able to disclose everything a doctor needs to know without fear that the information will somehow be disclosed to other people, she said. Although the decision forbids the use of the woman's medical records at trial, several lawyers told The Post that it doesn't prevent the defense from targeting her credibility by presenting other evidence. That could include 911 calls and witness testimony about suicide attempts. If, for example, there is a witness who says that a person who was on medication had been saying things that weren't true or could testify about facts that aren't part of the medical record, the judge can still find that evidence admissable, Steinhauser explained. Had Ruckriegle ruled in favor of the defense, such a decision could have had huge ramifications, in civil as well as criminal law. People needing the support of family and friends might not talk to them out of fear that their medical records could be made public. "And that's a horrible predicament to put them in," Steinhauser said. We applaud the court for striking a sensible balance between the rights of the accused to a vigorous defense and doctor-patient confidentiality. |