Not all courts have decided in this manner. In a recent departure, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in Jarmie v. Troncale (SC 18358 [Sept. 17, 2012]) that doctors are immune from third-party traffic accident lawsuits, as such litigation would detract from what’s best for the patient ("a physician’s desire to avoid lawsuits may result in far more restrictive advice than necessary for the patient’s well-being"). The defendant-gastroenterologist, Dr. Troncale, was treating a patient with hepatic encephalopathy and had not warned of the associated risk of driving.
Finally, there is the issue of the at-risk patient who insists on driving against medical advice. The doctor should spare no effort in trying to persuade such a patient to stop, even to the extent of notifying the motor licensing bureau.
According to the AMA Code of Medical Ethics (2.24 (3), 2010-2011 ed.), "Physicians should use their best judgment when determining when to report impairments that could limit a patient’s ability to drive safely. In situations where clear evidence of substantial driving impairment implies a strong threat to patient and public safety, and where the physician’s advice to discontinue driving privileges is ignored, it is desirable and ethical to notify the department of motor vehicles."
Dr. Tan is emeritus professor of medicine at the University of Hawaii. This article is meant to be educational and does not constitute medical, ethical, or legal advice. It is adapted from the author’s book, "Medical Malpractice: Understanding the Law, Managing the Risk" (2006). For additional information, readers may contact the author at siang@hawaii.edu.