§ 1. Mr. Woodhouseasked the Minister without Portfolio whether he will seek to amend the law which prevents doctors from declining to give evidence in court on matters which they have learned in professional consultation with their patients, in order to release them from jeopardy of imprisonment for contempt if they do so decline.
§ The Minister without Portfolio (Sir Eric Fletcher)This is a matter which will be considered by the Law Reform Committee in the course of its review of the law of evidence.
§ Mr. WoodhouseI am grateful to the Minister for his reply. May I ask if he has given consideration to the particular case of a psychiatrist who was compelled in a divorce action earlier this year to give evidence under threat of proceedings for contempt on matters which he had learned from one of the parties to the case in the course of his professional duties, and whether he is aware of the serious anxiety felt by many doctors, particularly psychiatrists, about the implications of such cases in their professional relationship with their clients?
§ Sir E. FletcherI am aware of that case and of the concern felt by the medical profession on this subject, and I have no doubt that these matters will be considered by the Law Reform Committee.
§ Sir Knox CunninghamWould the hon. Gentleman consider whether it is wise to increase the number of classes of person who can claim the privilege of not giving evidence in open court?
§ Sir E. FletcherI am aware, and I have no doubt that the Law Reform Committee will be equally aware, that if the present privilege in respect of confidential communications which at present is limited to those giving legal advice were to be extended to doctors there would be other professions which might make similar claims, such as priests and marriage guidance officers, and, of course, there is the case of journalists which has arisen recently.