Why do MDs priests & spouses have legal immunity to not be compelled to testify? Whats so special about EACH of those relationships to coverup crime?

[DrPepper12]

Seriously, why are some conversations "privileged"?

Isn't the greater good prosecution of criminal acts?

Why does this privilege not extend to law breaking for civil matters?

Wouldn't it be easier to have a neutral panel or ombudsman familiar with the law to have the ability to waive privilege after hearing the testimony that they are not allowed to divulge but only their decision to waive it or not? Wouldn't that get us closer to Justice?

Privilege for all three in criminal cases is important and necessary

Privilege for these three classes of people should not exist for criminal cases

Privilege should only exist for religious / spiritual leaders

Privilege should only exist for doctors and medical staff

Privilege should only exist for spouses

Privilege should be protected for BOTH criminal and civil matters

Privilege should not exist for any legal issue either civil or criminal.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know much about the MD situation. But I do know some relationships are legally protected and for arguably good reasons.

For example let’s say someone is struggling with some sort of addiction (which can or has lead to them to breaking the law). They seek a professional psychotherapist for assistance with their struggles. Do you think they are going to be more or less honest with their professional counselor about their problems knowing that same person could report them and/or testify against them later?

Now there are confidentially exceptions if the patient specifically says they’re actively harming a child or elder. Also exceptions of the patient explicitly says they plan to commit an act of violence against someone or themselves.

But most issues are gray areas. And if there aren’t confidentially agreements then someone might avoid getting the help they need, instead internalize it and ultimately get much worse.

Not sure if above related to your question but it’s just my two cents.

[DrPepper12]

Great cogent reply! You're right we wouldn't want to stifle conversations about health.

[Opinion Owner]

Truth is I sometimes visit a psychotherapist. Same guy for many years.

I’m not a violent criminal but even with him I sometimes feel hesitant to bring up some of my deepest darkest dirty laundry.

[Juxtapose]

You're supposed to have people you can turn to and have confidential conversations with regardless of what you have done.

If my conversations with my doctor for example was not confidential? Do you really think I would tell them anything? I could hide something like smoking weed or whatever and that could completely fuck me in a surgery.

[DrPepper12]

True. Good answer

[Juxtapose]

Thanks 👍

[GOLDFISH_smile]

At a basic level I think this is a good idea. Even if someone's a criminal they should still be allowed to pursue consensual relationship, to receive appropriate medical care, & to practice their religion at least privately.

Plus it helps protect those (more innocent) groups too: spouses, doctors, preists. If those people could be forced to testify willy nilly, then you'd have criminals have to be much more cautious & likely dangerous in how they seek relationships, medical care, & religious practice from those other people..

[DrPepper12]

Great answer! TY!!

[GOLDFISH_smile]

thanks & welcome! :)

[Yabbut]

If I had to guess, I'd say the reason these people can't be compelled to testify is because it would be at a trial, where guilt has not been established. If the defendant is found not guilty, the privilege will have been violated without a good reason. But, I'm just guessing, I could be completely wrong.

[normalice]

I think it's fair to account for the possibility that sometimes a law shouldn't be a law. But more than that if a wife could be compelled to testify the very first thing every criminal would ever do is kill their wife.

[DrPepper12]

I hadn't even considered that. You're right, we don't want to incentivize murder!

[RedInnocent69]

Because it’s understood as essential to be share even the most personal information with MDs and priests, and that spouses will always be aligned with and lie for the families.

[DrPepper12]

Even if it covers up crimes?

[RedInnocent69]

Yeah, as long as it doesn’t help commit a crime, like, in advance.

[Dongie]

I'll tell you why, because it is deemed more important that a person have a confidential ear to lean on for sanitys sake. When speaking with a pyschiatrist how is someone going to open up when the doc can talk. And as for the wife well shit.

[NathanDavis]

justice is blinded...

[gatixek710]

look at the little nazi.

[DrPepper12]

Moi? I'm asking a question that is over 5000 years old and is STILL debated today! Only people who see the world as binomial WOULDN'T examine questions like this. In effect I'm asking what's the greater good? Surely you're familiar with that from philosophy... Oh, right, You're a MAGA and you wouldn't understand where the word comes from: philo = love, Sophia = wisdom... SAD!

[gatixek710]

The “straight” dudes for kaMALA strike again