Taitz J
Department of Public Law, University of Durban-Westville.
S Afr Med J. 1990 Jul 7;78(1):29-33.
The legal situations of a medical practitioner who breaches the rule of medical confidentiality in warning an endangered third party on the one hand, and on the other a doctor who fails to warn an endangered third party (who subsequently suffers illness or other damages as a result) are addressed. There is no direct South African law applicable to either circumstance; accordingly these issues are examined in the light of general legal principles. Further, since there have been a series of important judicial decisions in the USA on this subject, American law is also considered. In the final analysis, it would appear that in South African law by breaching medical confidentiality in warning an endangered third party (subject to the doctor acting bona fide) a medical practitioner incurs no legal liability. It would also appear that failure to warn an endangered third party incurs no legal liability under South African law.
一方面探讨了医疗从业者在向濒危第三方发出警告时违反医疗保密规则的法律情形，另一方面探讨了医生未能向濒危第三方发出警告（该第三方随后因此患病或遭受其他损害）的法律情形。南非没有直接适用于这两种情况的法律；因此，根据一般法律原则对这些问题进行审查。此外，由于美国在这一主题上有一系列重要的司法判决，所以也考虑美国法律。归根结底，在南非法律中，医疗从业者在向濒危第三方发出警告时违反医疗保密规则（前提是医生出于善意行事）似乎不会承担法律责任。在南非法律下，未能向濒危第三方发出警告似乎也不会承担法律责任。
