Research in hospitals: Press Council specifies guidelines
According to Guideline 7.8, which explains the Journalists« Code of Ethics, »for on-site reporting in hospitals and similar institutions (...), the consent of those in charge must be obtained.” However, according to the Press Council, this does not mean that media professionals are required to obtain consent from hospital management or the hospital administration before every conversation at a hospital bedside.
Rather, the contact persons for media representatives are primarily the attending physicians and nursing staff, writes the Press Council in a statement on Tuesday. In principle, patients are free to decide whether they provide information to the media, even in a hospital environment.
At the end of 2011, Blick reported on a shooting at Mc Donald's in Biel. The report describes the attack from the point of view of the shift manager in charge, who was hit by three shots
was. A Blick journalist visited the injured man in hospital the following day and persuaded him to make a statement to the newspaper and to have his injury photographed. Mc Donald's Switzerland then complained to the Press Council, the journalist
had not disclosed her profession from the beginning and had harassed the victim, who was still in shock, until he had his wound photographed. This violated the privacy and human dignity of the employee concerned. Blick objected that the journalist had appeared in the company of a photographer and had introduced herself correctly. In addition, the interview had been interrupted by a doctor's visit, and later the injured man's wife had also joined the interview without anyone raising any objections.
The Press Council rejects the complaint. Visiting and interviewing an injured person in hospital one day after a multiple gunshot wound could violate privacy under certain circumstances.
In the specific case, however, it had not been proven that the Mc Donald's employee was still in shock. On the basis of all the circumstances, it must be assumed that the injured man answered the journalists' questions voluntarily. Neither had he made use of the bell usually available at a hospital bed, nor had he expressed himself to the doctors or his family to the effect that he wished to be left alone by Blick. Under these circumstances, at least tacit consent had to be assumed. Nor was it proven that the Blick journalist had exploited the plight of a victim who was still in shock and had thus violated his human dignity.
