DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Doctor-Patient Confidentiality in the Military

Posted on January 7, 2011 by Dissent

Privacy and confidentiality are not the same thing, of course, but an article by Patrick J Mclain,  a court martial lawyer and retired military law judge,  is worth noting on this blog.

Discussing some of the allegations made in the case of Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hassan (the alleged Fort Hood shooter),  Mclain notes that although people may think that Hassan was wrong in wanting to report some of his patients for war crimes,  there is a difference in exceptions to doctor-patient confidentiality between federal law and military justice. Although the military rule has  exceptions where there is a duty to breach confidentiality that parallel those in the civilian code, military code has some additional and specific exceptions.

Unlike the federal rules, which do not enumerate a list of exceptions to the psychotherapist-patient privilege, Rule 513 does provide explicit exceptions to the privilege. Some of these exceptions parallel the civilian rules, like reporting cases of spousal or child abuse or situations when the patient is a danger to him or herself or another person. However, some of the exceptions are unique.

Among other things:

  • The privilege ends at the patient’s death
  • The privilege is subject to mandatory reporting duties under not only federal and state law but also service regulations
  • The privilege can be breached when it is necessary to ensure the safety and security of military personnel, dependents, property, classified information or the accomplishment of a military mission

Read his full article on GOarticles.com.

The exceptions he notes raises some other questions in mind – including possible implications for Pfc Bradley Manning, the alleged source of over 250,000 cables provided to WikiLeaks.

Assuming, for the moment, that Manning was involved, it strikes me that even had he sought mental health assistance at any point when planning or having started to implement the copying of data, his communications would not have been protected by doctor-patient confidentiality.  Speaking hypothetically, any confused, distraught, or depressed soldier who seeks psychiatric assistance and reveals that he is thinking of blowing the whistle on what he has learned in the course of his work, would likely be reported.   Any soldier who is seriously depressed by their own actions in particular event or situation might be reported for war crimes depending on the nature of their revelation to the therapist.

Has the military shot itself in the foot by making it less likely for those who might be whistleblowers or conscientious protesters to seek help, assuming that protesters or those who have engaged in war crimes even know the military Rule 513 that limits their right to confidentiality?

Are we between the proverbial rock and a hard place?

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← Nursing student wins Facebook placenta photo case against JCCC
AU: Couple fighting govt over right to choose sex of their next child →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • AT&T gets preliminary approval for $177 million data breach settlement
  • Aflac notifies SEC of breach suspected to be work of Scattered Spider
  • Former JBLM soldier pleads guilty to attempting to share military secrets with China
  • No, the 16 billion credentials leak is not a new data breach — a wake-up call about fake news (Updated)
  • Tonga’s health system hit by cyberattack (1)
  • Russia Expert Falls Prey to Elite Hackers Disguised as US Officials
  • Proposed class action settlement in In re Netgain Technology litigation
  • Qilin Offers “Call a lawyer” Button For Affiliates Attempting To Extort Ransoms From Victims Who Won’t Pay
  • Ireland’s Data Protection Commission publishes 2024 Annual Report
  • The headlines suggested Freedman Healthcare suffered a ransomware attack that affected patient data. The reality was quite different.

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • The Markup caught 4 more states sharing personal health data with Big Tech
  • Privacy in the Big Sky State: Montana’s Consumer Privacy Law Gets Amended
  • UK Passes Data Use and Access Regulation Bill
  • Officials defend Liberal bill that would force hospitals, banks, hotels to hand over data
  • US Judge Invalidates Biden Rule Protecting Privacy for Abortions
  • DOJ’s Data Security Program: Key Compliance Considerations for Impacted Entities
  • 23andMe fined £2.31 million for failing to protect UK users’ genetic data

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.