HOUSE BILL REPORT

EHB 878

BYRepresentatives Crane, Miller, Armstrong, Heavey, Scott, Appelwick, Wang, Wineberry, P. King and Niemi

Revising provisions relating to the physician-patient privilege.

House Committe on Judiciary

Majority Report:     Do pass.  (9)

     Signed by Representatives Armstrong, Chair; Crane, Vice Chair; Appelwick, Heavey, P. King, Niemi, Scott, Wang and Wineberry.

Minority Report:     Do not pass. (7)

     Signed by Representatives Brough, Hargrove, Lewis, Moyer, Padden, Patrick and Schmidt.

House Staff:Bill Perry (786-7123)

AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 18, 1987

BACKGROUND:

Communications between a doctor and patient are "privileged".  That is, they may generally be disclosed only with the consent of the patient.  If, however, the patient puts his or her health at issue in a trial, the privilege will be waived.  Prior to a 1986 legislative enactment, that waiver of the privilege was determined by the trial court on a case-by-case basis.

In 1986, the legislature created a statutory method for the waiver of the doctor-patient privilege when a patient puts his or her health at issue in a trial.  Ninety days after filing a case, a plaintiff must elect whether to waive any privilege he or she may have.  If the plaintiff does not waive the privilege, he or she may not raise his or her mental or physical condition as an issue at trial.  Unless the judge rules otherwise based on court rules, any waiver extends to all doctors the plaintiff may have seen, and to any condition the plaintiff may have seen a doctor about.

SUMMARY:

Changes are made in the statutory procedure for waiving the doctor-patient privilege.  Waiver of the privilege occurs automatically 90 days after filing a personal injury or wrongful death action.  Limits are placed on the disclosure of information obtained from the plaintiff's doctor when the information is obtained by other than formal discovery procedures.  Unless the court authorizes additional disclosure, informally obtained information may be disclosed only to other participants in the legal action.

Fiscal Note:    Not Requested.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:     Prime Sponsor.

House Committee - Testified Against: Ellen Holm, Group Health Cooperative; John Rosendahl, Washington Defense Trial Lawyers Assoc.; Loren Winterscheid, Washington Medical Association.

House Committee - Testimony For:     The current law is a trap for unwary plaintiffs who may lose their rights because of the automatic waiver.  The bill also insures fairness in obtaining statements from treating physicians and appropriately limits the scope of the waiver.

House Committee - Testimony Against: The current law has not been given a chance to work.  The bill will increase the cost of gaining evidence for a trial and will cause delays.