It is a principle of ethical practise that patients must understand what is happening to them and consent to it. This is extremely important in working with torture survivors who have been in the situation of having no control over any aspect of their lives. It is essential that they do not feel powerless in the subsequent clinical setting. This is particularly true of medico-legal work in which the documentation will be in the public domain. As stated above, for consent to be valid, the patient must understand how the data gained from the examination will be used, how it will be stored and who will have access to it.
While all statements emphasise the obligation to act in the best interests of the individual being examined or treated, this presupposes that health professionals know what the patient’s interests are. A fundamental idea in modern medical ethics is that patients are the best judges of their own interests. This requires that health professionals should normally give precedence to the competent adult patient’s wishes. Where the patient is unconscious or otherwise incapable of giving valid consent, health professionals must make a judgement about how that person’s best interests can be protected and promoted. Nurses and doctors are expected to act as advocates of their patients’ well-being and this is made clear in professional statements.
Conflicts arise where health professionals are pressured or required by law to disclose information to third parties about patients without consent. This may include an obligation to report torture or serious crimes (possibly including torture itself). A health professional may receive an allegation of torture on the patients’ understanding that they are only seeking treatment and that the information will not be disclosed to others for fear of reprisals or other reasons. The health professional must contemplate the risks to the patient, and indeed to themselves, in disclosing such information, and the potential benefits to society as a whole (e.g. potentially avoiding further harm to others), before acting. Whatever decision is reached, the health professional should endeavour to gain consent. In such cases, the fundamental ethical obligations to respect autonomy and to act in the best interests of the patient are more important than other considerations. Health professionals should make clear to any authority requesting information that they are bound by professional duties of confidentiality. Health professionals responding in this way are entitled to the support of their professional association and colleagues.
The Geneva Conventions give particular protection to doctor-patient confidentiality in periods of international armed conflict, for example, requiring that doctors should not be compelled to disclose information about their patients to the opposing side.
