Volume 20, Issue 61 (4-2026)
MLJ 2026, 20(61): 514-530 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mirian Darbandi E S, Saeedi M A, Firoozabadian M. Civil Liability of Physicians Toward Patients Unfit to Drive: Reconsidering the Tension Between Professional Confidentiality and the Theory of Attribution. MLJ 2026; 20 (61) :514-530
URL: http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-2032-en.html
URL: http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-2032-en.html
1- . Department of Law, TOH.C., Islamic Azad University, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran
2- Department of Law, Razavi Islamic Sciences University, Mashhad, Iran.
2- Department of Law, Razavi Islamic Sciences University, Mashhad, Iran.
Abstract:
Background and Aim: Road traffic accidents remain one of the leading public health challenges in Iran and continue to pose significant concerns for criminal policy and health law. Human factors—particularly psychiatric disorders, neurological diseases, visual impairments, and the use of medications or substances affecting cognitive and psychomotor performance—constitute major contributors to road traffic injuries. Within this context, physicians occupy a unique position, possessing both specialized knowledge of a patient’s medical fitness to drive and awareness of the potential risks posed to public safety by continued driving. Nevertheless, Iranian law provides no clear legal framework defining physicians’ obligations when professional confidentiality conflicts with the duty to prevent foreseeable harm to third parties. This study therefore examines the legal foundations of physicians’ civil liability toward patients lacking fitness to drive and explores the extent to which such liability may be expanded on the basis of Islamic jurisprudence and contemporary theories of civil liability without undermining public trust in the healthcare system.
Methods: This study employed a descriptive–analytical and comparative legal approach. It draws upon the sources of Imamiyyah jurisprudence, civil law, health law, traffic regulations, domestic policy documents, and a comparative analysis of the legal systems of France, Germany, and the United States. Data were collected from legislation, judicial decisions, policy documents, and recent scholarly literature concerning physician liability, professional confidentiality, and the reporting of high-risk drivers, and were analyzed through legal and comparative content analysis.
Ethical Considerations: Throughout all stages of the research, the principles of academic integrity, honesty, and faithful citation of sources were fully observed.
Results: The findings demonstrate that, although Iranian traffic regulations prohibit certain medically unfit individuals from driving, Iranian law imposes no explicit or systematic legal duty upon physicians to report high-risk drivers to the competent authorities. This legislative gap places physicians in a continuing conflict between maintaining professional confidentiality and fulfilling their broader social responsibilities. Comparative analysis reveals that both France and Germany recognize statutory exceptions to medical confidentiality and provide physicians with civil immunity where disclosure is necessary to prevent serious threats to public safety. In the United States, although physician liability has traditionally remained confined to the physician–patient relationship, contemporary judicial developments increasingly recognize a qualified duty toward foreseeable third parties. From a theoretical perspective, the Islamic jurisprudential principle of La Zarar (the prohibition of harm), the principle of balancing competing interests (Ahamm wa Muhimm), and the theory of attribution collectively provide a persuasive normative basis for recognizing physician liability in exceptional circumstances.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that, by drawing upon Islamic jurisprudential principles, contemporary theories of civil liability, and comparative legal experience, it is possible to establish a coherent normative framework governing physicians’ civil liability toward patients lacking medical fitness to drive under Iranian law. Such a framework should incorporate proportionate disclosure, targeted reporting to competent authorities, comprehensive documentation, and statutory civil immunity for physicians acting in good faith.This approach would substantially mitigate the conflict between professional confidentiality and the prevention of harm, while simultaneously preserving public confidence in the healthcare system, enhancing road safety, protecting third parties, and strengthening the effectiveness of health law and civil liability law in Iran.
Please cite this article as:
Mirian Darbandi ES, Saeedi MA, Firoozabadian M. Civil Liability of Physicians Toward Patients Lacking Driving Competence with Reflection on the Conflict between Professional Confidentiality and Attributability. Medical Law Journal. 2026; 20: e34.
Methods: This study employed a descriptive–analytical and comparative legal approach. It draws upon the sources of Imamiyyah jurisprudence, civil law, health law, traffic regulations, domestic policy documents, and a comparative analysis of the legal systems of France, Germany, and the United States. Data were collected from legislation, judicial decisions, policy documents, and recent scholarly literature concerning physician liability, professional confidentiality, and the reporting of high-risk drivers, and were analyzed through legal and comparative content analysis.
Ethical Considerations: Throughout all stages of the research, the principles of academic integrity, honesty, and faithful citation of sources were fully observed.
Results: The findings demonstrate that, although Iranian traffic regulations prohibit certain medically unfit individuals from driving, Iranian law imposes no explicit or systematic legal duty upon physicians to report high-risk drivers to the competent authorities. This legislative gap places physicians in a continuing conflict between maintaining professional confidentiality and fulfilling their broader social responsibilities. Comparative analysis reveals that both France and Germany recognize statutory exceptions to medical confidentiality and provide physicians with civil immunity where disclosure is necessary to prevent serious threats to public safety. In the United States, although physician liability has traditionally remained confined to the physician–patient relationship, contemporary judicial developments increasingly recognize a qualified duty toward foreseeable third parties. From a theoretical perspective, the Islamic jurisprudential principle of La Zarar (the prohibition of harm), the principle of balancing competing interests (Ahamm wa Muhimm), and the theory of attribution collectively provide a persuasive normative basis for recognizing physician liability in exceptional circumstances.
Conclusion: The findings suggest that, by drawing upon Islamic jurisprudential principles, contemporary theories of civil liability, and comparative legal experience, it is possible to establish a coherent normative framework governing physicians’ civil liability toward patients lacking medical fitness to drive under Iranian law. Such a framework should incorporate proportionate disclosure, targeted reporting to competent authorities, comprehensive documentation, and statutory civil immunity for physicians acting in good faith.This approach would substantially mitigate the conflict between professional confidentiality and the prevention of harm, while simultaneously preserving public confidence in the healthcare system, enhancing road safety, protecting third parties, and strengthening the effectiveness of health law and civil liability law in Iran.
Please cite this article as:
Mirian Darbandi ES, Saeedi MA, Firoozabadian M. Civil Liability of Physicians Toward Patients Lacking Driving Competence with Reflection on the Conflict between Professional Confidentiality and Attributability. Medical Law Journal. 2026; 20: e34.
Keywords: Physician Civil Liability, Medical Fitness to Drive, Professional Confidentiality, Theory of Attribution, Road Safety, Comparative Medical Law.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Received: 2025/11/25 | Accepted: 2026/04/27
Received: 2025/11/25 | Accepted: 2026/04/27
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
