Health Care Analysis

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 105–129 | Cite as

The Need to Know—Therapeutic Privilege: A Way Forward

  • Kate HodkinsonEmail author
Original Article


Providing patients with information is fundamental to respecting autonomy. However, there may be circumstances when information may be withheld to prevent serious harm to the patient, a concept referred to as therapeutic privilege. This paper provides an analysis of the ethical, legal and professional considerations which impact on a decision to withhold information that, in normal circumstances, would be given to the patient. It considers the status of the therapeutic privilege in English case law and concludes that, while reference is made to circumstances when information (primarily in relation to risk disclosure) may be withheld, further clarification is required on the status of therapeutic privilege. I suggest there has been shift in English law relating to the standard of information disclosure towards one set by the test of the reasonable, prudent patient. It is this shift that necessitates the existence of a therapeutic privilege which enables doctors to withhold information that would usually be given to the patient in order to prevent serious harm. I then explore the professional guidance in relation to information disclosure and how this relates to the legal position. There are strong ethical arguments in favour of disclosure of information to patients. In light of these, further clarification is required to identify and define the grounds on which this exception exists, the information that could lawfully be withheld and how this exception extends to rest of the health care team, particularly nurses. As such, explicit ethical and legal scrutiny of therapeutic privilege is needed in order to consider how this concept might be articulated, constrained and regulated.


Doctor-patient relationship Health care team Information disclosure Therapeutic privilege Truth-telling 


  1. 1.
    AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust and another [2004]. 3 FCR 324.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arato v Avedon 5th Cal 4th 1172 23 Cal. Rptr 2d 131-858 P2d 598.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arber, A., & Gallagher, A. (2003). Breaking bad news revisited: The push for negotiated disclosure and changing practice implications. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 9(4), 166–172.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Begley, A., & Blackwood, B. (2000). Truth telling versus hope: A dilemma in practice. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 6, 26–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benn, P. (2001). Medicine, lies and deception. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27, 130–134.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berg, J., Appelbaum, P., Lidz, C., & Parker, L. (2001). Informed consent legal theory and clinical practice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bok, S. (1999). Lying: Moral choice in public and private life. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bolitho v City Hackney Health Authority [1997] 39 BLMR.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bostick, N., Sade, R., McMahon, J., & Benjamin, R. (2006). Report of the American Medical Association Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (CEJA): Withholding information from patients: Rethinking the propriety of ‘therapeutic privilege’. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 17(4), 302–306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brazier, M., & Miola, J. (2000). Bye-bye Bolam: A medical litigation revolution? Medical Law Review, 8 Spring, 85–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brazier, M., & Cave, E. (2007). Medicine, patients and the law. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Buchanan, A. (1978). Medical paternalism. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 7(4), 370–390.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Canterbury v Spence 464 F.2d 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chalmers, D., & Schwatrz, R. (1993). Rogers v Whitaker and informed consent: A fair dinkum duty of disclosure. Medical Law Review, 1 Summer, 139–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chatterton v Gerson and another [1981] 1 All ER 257.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chiarella, M. (2001). Silence in court: The devaluation of the stories of nurses in the narratives of health law. Nursing Inquiry, 7(3), 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cote, A. (2000). Telling the truth? Disclosure, therapeutic privilege and intersexuality in children. Health Law Journal, 8, 199–216.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Department of Health. (2009). Reference guide to consent for examination or treatment (2nd ed.). London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Devany, S. (2005). Autonomy rules ok. Medical Law Review, Spring 13(1), 102–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dimond, B. (2004). Legal aspects of nursing (4th ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dwyer & Roderick and Others [1983] 127 SJ 805.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Eliott, J., & Olver, I. (2007). Hope and hoping in the talk of dying cancer patients. Social Science and Medicine, 64, 138–149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Etchells, E., Sharpe, G., Burgess, M., Singer, P. (1996). Bioethics for clinicians: 2. Disclosure Can Med Assoc J, 155(4), 387–391.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Everett, J., Walters, C., Stottlemyer, D., Knight, C., Oppenberg, A., & Orr, R. (2011). To lie or not to lie: resident physician attitudes about the use of deception in clinical practice. Journal of Medical Ethics, 10, 333–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Faden, R., Beaucham, T., & King, N. (1986). A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fallowfield, L., Ratcliffe, D., Jenkins, V., & Saul, J. (2001). Psychological morbidity and its recognition by doctors in patients with cancer. British Journal Cancer, 84, 1011–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fallowfield, L., Jenkins, V., & Beveridge, H. (2002). Truth may hurt but deceit hurts more: Communication in palliative care. Palliative Medicine, 16, 297–303.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fovargue, S., & Miola, J. (2010). One step forward, two steps back? The GMC, the common law and ‘informed’ consent. Journal of Medical Ethics, 36, 494–497.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fovargue, S., & Miola, J. (2010). How much information is ‘enough’? Clinical Ethics, 5(13), 15.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Glass, E., & Cluxton, D. (2004). Truth-telling: Ethical issues in clinical practice. Journal of Hospice and Palliative Nursing, 6(4), 232–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    General Medical Council. (1998). Seeking patients consent: The ethical considerations. London: General Medical Council.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    General Medical Council. (2008). Consent: Patients and doctors making decisions together. London: General Medical Council.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    General Medical Council. (2006). Good medical practice: Duties of a doctor. London: General Medical Council.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gold, M. (2004). Is honesty always the best policy? Ethical aspects of truth-telling. International Medicine Journal, 34, 578–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hagerty, R., Butow, P., Ellis, P., Lobb, E., Pendlebury, S., Leighl, N., et al. (2005). Communicating with realism and hope: Incurable cancer patients’ views on the disclosure of prognosis. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23(9), 1278–1288.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hartwell, M. (2005). Can doctors and nurse still rely on the doctrine that they know best? Legal Medicine, 7, 293–298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hebert, P., & Glass, K. (1997). Truth telling. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 156(2), 225–228.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Herring, J. (2008). Medical law and ethics (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hewitt, J. (2002). A critical review of the arguments debating the role of the nurse advocate. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 37(5), 439–444.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Heywood, R. (2009). Subjectivity in risk disclosure: Considering the position of the particular patient. Journal of Professional Negligence, 25, 3–14.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Heywood, R., Macaskill, A., & Williams, K. (2010). Informed consent in hospital practice: Health professionals’ perspectives and legal reflections. Medical Law Review, Spring 18, 152–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Jackson, E. (2006). Treatment and the impotence of tort, Chap. 17. In S. McLean (Ed.), First do no harm. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jackson, J. (2001). Truth, trust and medicine. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jacobs, K. (2004). Accountability and clinical governance in nursing, Chap. 3. In S. Tilley & R. Watson (Eds.), Accountability in nursing and midwifery (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Johnson, C., & Holt, G. (2006). The legal and ethical implications of therapeutic privilege-is it ever justified to withhold information from a competent patient? Clinical Ethics, 1(3), 146–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Jones, M. (1999). Informed consent and other fairy stories. Medical Law Review, Spring 7, 103–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kirklin, D. (2007). Framing, truth telling and the problem with non-directive counselling. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 58–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Maclean, A. (2009). Autonomy, informed consent and medical law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Maclean, A. (2006). The doctrine of informed consent; does it exist and has it crossed the Atlantic? Legal Studies, 24(3), 386–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Marzanski, M. (2000). Would you like to know what is wrong with you? On telling the truth to patients with dementia. Journal of Medical Ethics, 26, 108–113.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Mason, K., & Brodie, D. (2005). Bolam, Bolam where for art thou Bolam? The Edinburgh Law Review, 9, 398–406.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mason, J., & Laurie, G. (2006). Mason & McCall Smith’s Law and medical ethics (7th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    McCallister v Lewisham and North Southwark Health Authority and Others [1994] 5 Med LR 343.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    McHale, J. (2002). Quality in health care: A role for the law? Quality and Safety in Health Care, 11, 88–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    McLean, S., & Mason, K. (2004). Legal and ethical aspects of health care. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    McLean, S. (2010). Autonomy, consent and the law. Oxon: Routledge-Cavendish.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Miola, J. (2007). Medical ethics and medical law: A symbiotic relationship. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Miola, J. (2009). On the materiality of risk: Paper tigers and panaceas. Medical Law Review, 17 Spring, 76–108.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Nursing Midwifery Council. (2008). The Code: Standards of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives. London: Nursing Midwifery Council.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Pearce and another v United Bristol healthcare NHS Trust [1998] 47 BMLR 118.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pirakitikular, D., & Bursztajn, H. (2006). The Grand Inquisitor’s choice: Comment on the CEJA report on withholding information from patients. Journal of Clinical Ethics, 17(4), 307–311.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Prendergast v Sam and Dee Ltd [1989] 1 Med LR 36.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Reibl v Hughes [1980] 2 S.C.R 880.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Richard, C., Lajeunesse, Y., & Lussier, M. (2010). Therapeutic privilege: Between the ethics of lying and the practice of truth. Journal of Medical Ethics, 36, 353–357.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Rogers v Whitaker [1992] 16 B.M.L.R. 148 Joint ruling Mason CJ, Brennen, Dawson, Toohey, McHugh JJ.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rosenberg v Percival [2001] 205 CLR 434.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Sidaway v Benthlam Royal Hospital Governors and Others [1985] 1 All E.R. 643.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sirotin, N., & Lo, B. (2006). The end of therapeutic privilege? Journal of Clinical Ethics, 17(4), 312–316.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sokol, D. (2007). Can deceiving patients be morally acceptable? British Medical Journal, 334, 984–986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Sokol, D. (2006). Truth-telling in the doctor-patient relationship: A case analysis. Clinical Ethics, 1(3), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tickner, K. (1995). Rogers v Whitaker: Giving patients a meaningful choice. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Spring, 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Tuckett, T. (2004). Truth-telling in clinical practice and the arguments for and against: A review of the literature. Nursing Ethics, 11(5), 500–513.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Veitch, K. (2007). The jurisdiction of medical law. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority [1986] 3 All ER 801.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wong, J., Poon, Y., & Hui, E. (2005). I can put the medicine in his soup, Doctor! Journal of Medical Ethics, 31, 262–265.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Woolf, L. (2001). Are the courts excessively deferential to the medical profession? Medical Law Review, Spring, 1–16.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bioethics and Medical Jurisprudence, School of LawUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations