either to mentally or physically weaken the individual, or to instil disorientation, dependence, fear and so on, then this may amount to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, contrary to international law and standards of medical ethics. Health professionals involved in such acts will be culpable to the same degree that the prison or security forces are culpable. Similarly if a physician or any other health staff divulge confidential medical information on a patient primarily to serve the purposes of the interrogation, this would be unethical, and in those cases where the interrogation amounts to torture or other ill-treatment, this would amount to complicity in those acts or omissions. Does a prisoner in solitary confinement lose the right to access healthcare? No. It is a matter of international law that every person, including all prisoners (regardless of their location within a prison, and regardless of any disciplinary infraction they may have committed), retain the right to access and receive appropriate health care80. This right places a positive duty on prison authorities and governments to provide prisoners with a level of healthcare equivalent to that provided in the community, and this obligation should be reflected in national legislation and national prison rules and regulations. In England and Wales, the principle of equivalence of care has been endorsed by Parliament and incorporated into the Prison Service’s standards and guidelines81.. This requirement excludes the right to choose one’s own doctor (BMA 1992:177). The ethical obligation to provide healthcare to prisoners on an equivalent level to that available in the local community is also clearly stated in several international instruments: Health personnel, particularly physicians, charged with the medical care of prisoners and detainees have a duty to provide them with protection of their physical and mental health and treatment of disease of the same quality and standard as is afforded to those who are not imprisoned or detained (Principle 1 of the UN Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the Role of Health Personnel, 1982) Thus anyone placed in solitary confinement, for however long, does not forfeit the right to request medical attention, to be seen without delay, and to receive treatment appropriate to the nature and gravity of the problem. As in any other section of the prison, prison staff may alert the health staff to potential or actual health problems that the prisoner himself may not have noticed. In the first instance this should be done with the consent of the prisoner, who may not wish to see a member of the health staff, but if the staff consider that the condition may be a risk to the individual then they should alert the health staff. It is also recommended that, where they have concerns about a particular prisoner in solitary confinement, doctors visit that prisoner at their own initiative, even if the prisoner did not request this (WHO Health in Prisons, 2007:36). This is good practice, which is in line with principles of assertive community treatment outside the prison. Finally, prisoners’ right to health has been recognised as an integral part of wider public health promotion and protection in the community, because prisoners are a part of society, with the vast majority passing through prison for relatively short periods before returning to the community. 62 Sourcebook on solitary confinement: The role of health professionals in segregation units