nu Discussion L CONFIDENTIALITY Michel and what is the great moral dilemma about
ID: 3503849 • Letter: N
Question
nu Discussion L CONFIDENTIALITY Michel and what is the great moral dilemma about her case? Questions 263 Who is Anneliese and , qualities of confidentiality. What does it refer to and what are the duties conferred by confidentiality? situation refer The Sion referring to what form of confidentiality? the mentally ill, the aged, and the very young are in a paradoxical A Defense of Unqualified Medical Confidentiality keneth Kipnis Karoeth Kipnis is professor of philosophy at the hiversity of Hawaii at Manoa. 1982: After moving to Honolulu, Wilma and Andrew Long visit your office and ask you to be their family physician. They have been your patients ever since. ts broadly held that confidentiality may be tached when doing so can avert grave harm to a 18R. 1988: Six years later the two decide to separate. s, f tid party. This essay challenges the conventional ,idom Neither legal duties, personal morality nor rsal values are sufficient to ground professional igtions. A methodology is developed drawing on re professional values, the nature of professions, al te justification for distinct professional obliga- Thsugh doctors have a professional obligation 1revent public peril, they do not honor it by i- tdhing confidentiality. It is shown how the pro- dse purpose to be furthered by reporting is de y the practice of reporting. Hence there is no Wilma leaves for the Mainland, occasionally sending you a postcard. Though you do not see her professionally, you still think of your self as her doctor. es 1990: Andrew comes in and says that he has em- ife. barked upon a more sophisticated social I He has been hearing about some new sexually transmitted diseases and wants to be tested Testing reveals that he is positive for the AIDS virus, and he receives appropriate counseling. 0- tells you Wilma is returning to Hawaii for rec- onciliation with him. She arrives that after noon and will be staying at the Moana Hotel. Despite your best efforts to persuade him, Andrew leaves without giving you assurance he of pibilitdenaity and the professional 1991: Visiting your office for a checkup, Andrew y to protect endangered third parties. CASE OF THE INFECTED SPOUSE Andrew leaves Wilma about ies lized case is based on an of protect her against becoming infected. to Jounal of Bioethics (2006), 6:2,7-18.Explanation / Answer
" The case of the Infected Spouse ", the story is all about a couple getting infected. The husband , Andrew was unknowingly infected before he got to know that he was carrying the virus of HIV/AIDS. This infection was spread to his wife , Wilma as well . They were sexually active ,and this increased the risk of HIV/AIDS. If something was creating a trouble for Andrews regarding his body , as the body gives signal to the person when he/ she is not feeling well. If he would have been alert in his case , his wife Wilma would not have suffered from HIV/AIDS. Andrews is primarily responsible for this.
According to me , his wife , Wilma must be knowing about the infection she is carrying .
Firstly , knowing the information the doctor is well versed with the medical certainity that Andrew is both infectious as well as suffering from HIV/AIDS.
Secondly , considering Wilma as his patient , the doctor is supposing her not to be infected . It is so because , she cannot be at a risk and needs to be saved.
Thirdly , The infection which she (Wilma ) is carrying is both serious and real . Couple's sexuality makes it more risky .
Fourthly, as the goal is to make Wilma to be in a good health and letting her know about Andrew's condition. She will try to save herself from this risky situation.
He tries to breach the confidentiality . He wont let Wilma know about Andrew's condition and niether he will warn Wilma . According to him , this is not a trivial condition. Couples who know about their illness , do show their love . Knowing this might infect the other person , still indulges into it. People such as Soldiers, police , firefighters put their lives at risk knowing the fact that the work they do , might land up in trouble and may die. For him , warning Wilma will not save her from the risk. Hence , it is the duty of the doctor to save Wilma , by not letting her know about the problem.
No , I dont think this is correct . Letting the person( wilma ) know about her health condition could save her . Atleast she must know that she is suffering from a serious problem . Breaching is an illegal act. This should be avoided.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.