Court Opinion

ID: 9620302
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 05:40:45.553486+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:49.289897
License: Public Domain

Hunt, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I agree with the dissent of Justice Carley and write separately to emphasize, as Justice Sears points out in her concurrence, that nowadays the general practice of medicine almost always involves a consideration of and treatment of a patient’s emotional disorders, as well as those of a physical nature. Treatment for anxiety, depression, and related problems are routine matters for internists such as Dr. Wiles.6 But that fact does not convert the internist into a psychiatrist any more than the routine treatment of cardiovascular complaints converts the internist into a cardiologist. Rather than voting for the judicial legislation proposed by the majority opinion, I would refer this matter to the General Assembly for its consideration as to whether the statute should be amended so as to protect communications of this sort regardless of the kind of practice engaged in by the person to whom the information is communicated.

 “The internist, particularly in this day and age, must enhance his ability to recognize, evaluate, and manage psychiatric problems commonly seen in the practice of medicine.. .. We have accepted the fact that the internist cannot escape from dealing with the practical questions arising from emotional disorders. ... In many instances, the internist can cope with his patients’ emotional problems alone if he is properly aware of their nature and of the therapeutic measures available to him.”
Preface to Psychiatry and the Internist (P. Fink & W. Oaks, 1970).