In short
If a physician is called as a witness, the status is the word "witness" in the heading of the summons paper. This word does not stand in for the status of a suspect. A witness is called in order to recount what he saw or what passed into the record. A suspect is the person about whom an investigation is conducted. The scope of information learned by reason of the profession is not widened by a list before the question that was asked, and the consent of the person concerned, are seen. There is no route of lying in this text.
The heading of the summons paper
If the paper writes witness, the status of that session is witness. If the paper writes suspect, the status is suspect. If there is no heading, a heading is not invented. If the file number, the day, and the authority stand on the paper, they are read from there. The authority is not chosen from the address of the office. If the summons writes whether it is for a statement or for a hearing, that place is read. If the place was not written, the place is not completed. A place that is not completed does not change the status either.
Two papers may come to the same physician. If one is witness and one is suspect, each session is entered with its own heading. The witness paper does not cross out the suspect paper. The suspect paper does not change the status by being signed like a witness statement either. The two numbers may recount the same event. The same event does not make the two statuses one status. The assumption that does so is not built in this text.
The summons may carry a file number in the place of the patient's name. The number shows about which patient the physician will be asked. If the patient's name is not on the paper, the name is not added by being chosen from the physician's own list. A name that is not added does not widen the scope of the secret either. A scope that is not widened does not make the summons invalid. Validity is not stated before the heading and the authority are seen.
On which day the service fell is read from the date on the paper. If there is no date, a date is not invented. A date that is not invented is not made a period day in this text either. If what will happen if one does not go is written in the summons text, that sentence is read. If it is not, the result is not completed from this page.
What is asked in the status of a witness
The witness may be asked whether he saw the patient, what he wrote in the note, and at which hour who took over. The answer is recounted as limited to what stands on the chart and in the note. A finding that is not in the note is not added as a picture that was remembered. This text does not teach which sentence will be built. What passes into the minutes is the sentence said in that session. If the minutes and the note conflict, the conflict is kept. One is not used in order to erase the other.
False testimony is a separate claim of an offence. How it would be built, how it would be concealed, and how identity would be covered are not written. The statement is read in the minutes. A later change of the line in the record is not the subject of this summons either. That claim is in the record the medical record. This page does not give a route of tampering with the record. The status of a witness does not give authority to correct the note retrospectively either. A status that does not give it does not teach a route of filling an empty box either.
A witness may meet a question about his own act. Refraining from answering a question of a nature that may expose him, or a relative the statute shows, to a criminal prosecution stands separately in article 48 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271. This refraining is not a copy of refraining on a professional secret. It is not a copy of silence in the status of a suspect either. Which question entered article 48 is not chosen before the sentence of the question is seen. A question that is not chosen is not made a sample answer in this text.
The separation of a criminal investigation and an action for compensation is in the record criminal proceedings and compensation. A witness summons does not of itself write the status of a party in the action for compensation. A status that writes it is looked for in the heading of the summons. If the heading is witness, the session is not conducted like an account by a defendant.
The suspect paper
The status of a suspect shows that there is an investigation about the physician's own act. In this status, silence and defence counsel are separate from refraining in the status of a witness. The two are not used with the same sentence. This page does not write a statement text for the suspect. The place where a statement text is not written does not teach which sentence will be built either. A sentence that is not taught is not the route of a false statement.
If the complaint relates to the physician's own procedure, the paper is still read from its heading. If the heading is witness, that session is the status of a witness. The person choosing another status from within does not change the paper. If the heading is suspect, the session is not conducted like a witness account. A mixture that is not conducted does not make both sets of minutes a single statement. Each set of minutes carries its own heading.
The charge on the suspect paper is not accepted as a summary of the medical note. Whichever act the charge writes, that act is read. If there is no counterpart in the note, the absence is written. The absence does not of itself bring the charge down. An absence that does not bring it down does not translate the note into the language of the charge either. A reading that does not translate does not choose a type of offence. A type that is not chosen is not completed in this text with an article number.
If the defence-counsel line is empty, the gap is not filled as if there were counsel. A gap that is not filled does not turn the status of a suspect into the status of a witness either. A gap that does not turn it is not made a sample petition on this page.
The secret and consent
Article 46 of the same code writes that physicians, dentists, pharmacists, midwives and their assistants, and members of the other medical professions or arts, may refrain from testimony as to information they learned about their patients and the relatives of those patients by reason of these statuses. The second paragraph of the same article says that persons other than lawyers, or their trainees or assistants, cannot refrain from testimony if the person concerned has given consent. The physician is inside this second paragraph. If the consent document is not in the file, it is left as absent. The scope is not widened as if it existed. If there is consent, refraining cannot be used as regards this article. Which question the consent document covers is read from the document's own sentence. If there is no sentence, the sentence is not completed.
Which question entered this limit is not chosen before the question on the summons and the consent document are seen. The limit is not multiplied in this text as an image, as correspondence, or as an account of a case whose identity was erased. A list that is not multiplied does not make every question a secret. A question that is not a secret is not turned into the sentence that every question is free either. A sentence that is not turned does not give the physician a ready answer text.
The frame of the right of privacy is in the record patient privacy. Refraining is not carrying every sentence of that frame into the witness box. A consent form relating to treatment is not a document of consent to testimony. The definition of consent is in the article informed consent. A treatment risk written on the form does not mean the patient consented to testimony. Consent is read from its own paper in the summons file.
The two statuses do not melt in the same sentence
A sentence said in the witness session is not read as the statement of the suspect session. That there was silence in the suspect session is not completed as the ground of refraining in the witness session. Each session stays in its own minutes. Minutes that stay do not cross out the other. An act that crosses out is read only if it stands on the paper. If it does not, it is left as not standing.
The physician may be both the person who treated and the person called later, in the same event. The two roles are not reduced to a single role before the heading of the summons is seen. A role that is not reduced does not of itself write the status of a party in the compensation file either. The party is read from the name on the petition in the action. If the name on the petition and the status on the summons conflict, both are kept. A conflict that is kept is not closed by erasing one.
The office being in Çankaya does not change the prosecution office or the court on the summons. The authority is in the heading of the paper. If the authority in the heading and the place the service came from diverge, the divergence is written. The divergence does not change the status either.
If the summons counts more than one patient file on the same paper, each file is read with its own number. If there is no number, which patient was asked about is not completed. A patient who is not completed does not carry all of the physician's notes of that day into the box. A summons that does not carry them does not spread the scope of the secret over the whole archive. A chart brought in the status of a witness is not accepted as a copy corrected by the physician's hand. The copy is read in the state that stands in the file. If there is a trace of a correction, the trace is the subject of a separate record. This page does not write how the trace would be left. A route that is not written does not teach the sentence that will pass into the minutes either.
Conclusion
A witness summons and a suspect summons are not the same status. The status is read from the heading of the paper. The scope of the secret is not turned from the article text into a memorised list. False testimony is not taught. The frame is on the health law page. If the heading of the summons is to be read, contact is open. The route that is opened is not a statement text or a promise of a result.
The basis is article 46 and article 48 of Law No. 5271. Another article is not added in this writing in order to widen the scope. Refraining is not chosen before the consent document is seen.