|
Physician–patient Privilege
Physician–patient privilege is a legal concept, related to medical confidentiality, that protects communications between a patient and their doctor from being used against the patient in court. It is a part of the rules of evidence in many common law jurisdictions. Almost every jurisdiction that recognizes physician–patient privilege not to testify in court, either by statute or through case law, limits the privilege to knowledge acquired during the course of providing medical services. In some jurisdictions, conversations between a patient and physician may be privileged in both criminal and civil courts. Scope The privilege may cover the situation where a patient confesses to a psychiatrist that they committed a particular crime. It may also cover normal inquiries regarding matters such as injuries that may result in civil action. For example, any defendant that the patient may be suing at the time cannot ask the doctor if the patient ever expressed the belief that their co ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Confidentiality
Confidentiality involves a set of rules or a promise usually executed through confidentiality agreements that limits the access or places restrictions on certain types of information. Legal confidentiality By law, lawyers are often required to keep confidential anything pertaining to the representation of a client. The duty of confidentiality is much broader than the attorney–client evidentiary privilege, which only covers ''communications'' between the attorney and the client. Both the privilege and the duty serve the purpose of encouraging clients to speak frankly about their cases. This way, lawyers can carry out their duty to provide clients with zealous representation. Otherwise, the opposing side may be able to surprise the lawyer in court with something he did not know about his client, which may weaken the client's position. Also, a distrustful client might hide a relevant fact he thinks is incriminating, but that a skilled lawyer could turn to the client's advanta ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Journalist
A journalist is an individual that collects/gathers information in form of text, audio, or pictures, processes them into a news-worthy form, and disseminates it to the public. The act or process mainly done by the journalist is called journalism. Roles Journalists can be broadcast, print, advertising, and public relations personnel, and, depending on the form of journalism, the term ''journalist'' may also include various categories of individuals as per the roles they play in the process. This includes reporters, correspondents, citizen journalists, editors, editorial-writers, columnists, and visual journalists, such as photojournalists (journalists who use the medium of photography). A reporter is a type of journalist who researches, writes and reports on information in order to present using sources. This may entail conducting interviews, information-gathering and/or writing articles. Reporters may split their time between working in a newsroom, or from home, and going ou ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Privileged Communication
In the law of evidence, a privilege is a rule of evidence that allows the holder of the privilege to refuse to disclose information or provide evidence about a certain subject or to bar such evidence from being disclosed or used in a judicial or other proceeding. There are many such privileges recognised by the judicial system, some stemming from the common law and others from statute law. Each privilege has its own rules, which often vary between jurisdictions. Types One well known privilege is the solicitor–client privilege, referred to as the attorney–client privilege in the United States and as the legal professional privilege in Australia. This protects confidential communications between a client and his or her legal adviser for the dominant purpose of legal advice. The rationale is that clients ought to be able to communicate freely with their lawyers, in order to facilitate the proper functioning of the legal system. Other common forms include privilege against com ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Subpoena Ad Testificandum
A ''subpoena ad testificandum'' is a court summons to appear and give oral testimony for use at a hearing or trial. The use of a writ for purposes of compelling testimony originated in the ecclesiastical courts of Church during the High Middle Ages, especially in England. The use of the subpoena writ was gradually adopted over time by civil and criminal courts in England and the European continent. History The subpoena developed as a creative writ, the "writ subpoena", from the Court of Chancery. Writs of many kinds formed the essential parts of litigation. The primary function of a writ in the 13th and 14th centuries was to convey the king's commands to his officers and servants. It was irrelevant what the nature of those commands might be. The Register of Writs shows a large variety of writs to be administrative in nature, as opposed to judicial. These former writs acquired the name prerogative writs in the 17th and 18th centuries. Prerogative writs that have survived in ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Subpoena Duces Tecum
A ''subpoena duces tecum'' (pronounced in English ), or subpoena for production of evidence, is a court summons ordering the recipient to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing or trial. In some jurisdictions, it can also be issued by legislative bodies such as county boards of supervisors. The summons is known by various names in different jurisdictions. The term ''subpoena duces tecum'' is used in the United States, as well as some other common law jurisdictions such as South Africa and Canada. The summons is called a "subpoena for production of evidence" in some U.S. states that have sought to reduce the use of non-English words and phrases in court terminology. The ''subpoena duces tecum'' is similar to the ''subpoena ad testificandum'', which is a writ summoning a witness to testify orally. However, unlike the latter summons, the ''subpoena duces tecum'' instructs the witness to bring in hand books, papers, or evidence f ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Medical Privacy
Medical privacy or health privacy is the practice of maintaining the security and confidentiality of patient records. It involves both the conversational discretion of health care providers and the security of medical records. The terms can also refer to the physical privacy of patients from other patients and providers while in a medical facility, and to modesty in medical settings. Modern concerns include the degree of disclosure to insurance companies, employers, and other third parties. The advent of electronic medical records (EMR) and patient care management systems (PCMS) have raised new concerns about privacy, balanced with efforts to reduce duplication of services and medical errors. Most developed countries including Australia, Canada, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand, and the Netherlands have enacted laws protecting people's medical health privacy. However, many of these health securing privacy laws have proven less effective in practice than i ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Doctor–patient Relationship
The doctor–patient relationship is a central part of health care and the practice of medicine. A doctor–patient relationship is formed when a doctor attends to a patient's medical needs and is usually through consent. This relationship is built on trust, respect, communication, and a common understanding of both the doctor and patients' sides. The trust aspect of this relationship goes is mutual: the doctor trusts the patient to reveal any information that may be relevant to the case, and in turn, the patient trusts the doctor to respect their privacy and not disclose this information to outside parties. An important dynamic of the doctor–patient relationship is that the doctor is bonded by oath to follow certain ethical guidelines (Hippocratic Oath) whereas the patient is not. Additionally, the healthiness of a doctor–patient relationship is essential to keep the quality of the patient's healthcare high as well as to ensure that the doctor is functioning at their optimum ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Attorney–client Privilege
Attorney–client privilege or lawyer–client privilege is the name given to the common law concept of legal professional privilege in the United States. Attorney–client privilege is " client's right to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing confidential communications between the client and the attorney." The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest privileges for confidential communications. The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality, the privilege encourages clients to make "full and frank" disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation. General requirements under United States law Although there are minor variations, the elements necessary to establish the attorney–client privilege generally are: # The asserted holder of the privilege is (or sought to become) a client; and # The person to whom the communication was made: ## is a member ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Privilege (evidence)
In the law of evidence, a privilege is a rule of evidence that allows the holder of the privilege to refuse to disclose information or provide evidence about a certain subject or to bar such evidence from being disclosed or used in a judicial or other proceeding. There are many such privileges recognised by the judicial system, some stemming from the common law and others from statute law. Each privilege has its own rules, which often vary between jurisdictions. Types One well known privilege is the solicitor–client privilege, referred to as the attorney–client privilege in the United States and as the legal professional privilege in Australia. This protects confidential communications between a client and his or her legal adviser for the dominant purpose of legal advice. The rationale is that clients ought to be able to communicate freely with their lawyers, in order to facilitate the proper functioning of the legal system. Other common forms include privilege against com ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Privilege (evidence)
In the law of evidence, a privilege is a rule of evidence that allows the holder of the privilege to refuse to disclose information or provide evidence about a certain subject or to bar such evidence from being disclosed or used in a judicial or other proceeding. There are many such privileges recognised by the judicial system, some stemming from the common law and others from statute law. Each privilege has its own rules, which often vary between jurisdictions. Types One well known privilege is the solicitor–client privilege, referred to as the attorney–client privilege in the United States and as the legal professional privilege in Australia. This protects confidential communications between a client and his or her legal adviser for the dominant purpose of legal advice. The rationale is that clients ought to be able to communicate freely with their lawyers, in order to facilitate the proper functioning of the legal system. Other common forms include privilege against com ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Public Interest
The public interest is "the welfare or well-being of the general public" and society. Overview Economist Lok Sang Ho in his ''Public Policy and the Public Interest'' argues that the public interest must be assessed impartially and, therefore, defines the public interest as the "''ex ante'' welfare of the representative individual." Under a thought experiment, by assuming that there is an equal chance for one to be anyone in society and, thus, could benefit or suffer from a change, the public interest is by definition enhanced whenever that change is preferred to the status quo ''ex ante''. This approach is "''ex ante''", in the sense that the change is not evaluated after the fact but assessed before the fact without knowing whether one would actually benefit or suffer from it. This approach follows the "veil of ignorance" approach, which was first proposed by John Harsanyi but popularized by John Rawls in his 1971 ''Theory of Justice''. Historically, however, the approach ca ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> Journalist")
