• Prophet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      But doctors are required to report anything that they identify as an immediate physical threat (e.g., to the patient or because of the patient). I found out recently that this is entirely subjective - different doctors have different ideas about what constitutes a threat. So, in a lot of ways, no, medical secrecy may not protect you if you tell the wrong doctor.

      • khalic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        You underestimate how much medical professionals cherish their license. And immediate danger is well defined. Maybe these people should accept that they might need to be restrained in case there is a risk of them raping a child.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You underestimate how sheltered, bureaucratic and extraordinarily hard it is for a medical practitioner to lose their license. I’ve seen literal convicted murderers who didn’t lose their license and were still licensed doctors (for a while) while in prison. I’ve seen rapists retain the medical license that allowed them access to their victims.

    • Lowlee Kun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      While that is true it would be enough for a therapist to say they see someone as a threat. As hate for pedophiles is on a rather high level i understand the fear however unwarranted it might be. Luckely at least in germany there is some kind of help group named somewhat like “Kein Täter werden” if i remember correctly. I think we could use more of that in more countries.