Should Doctors Lie To The Truth

While thinking that many are incapable of knowing the truth, it’s also partial of one’s principles when mixing the truth with lies as physician. When one lie begins many more might not be recognized. This has significant into how many lies can be told without the patient’s knowledge. How many more lie to come? It’s unknown of how many lies will be unrecognized, therefor doctors should not lie to their patients not even once. Morally doctors have the obligations of fairness to their patient. Making such a decision for a patient by lying to them can contradict a doctor’s responsibilities to perform ethically. So, while doctors might feel patients can’t handle the truth, it’s the patients right to decided that. Some will argue that when a vulnerable

Goldman brings up a more controversial situation in which the physician effectively deceives the patient by withholding information pertaining to the patients’ medical condition from the patient himself. He maintains that the right to be told the truth is not innate, and just as in the case of coercion, it must be determined whether the information might be detrimental to the patients’ health directly or whether it might affect

Currently, most people generally accept a doctor’s word as truth and do not question him or her. When it comes to the medical field, patients can often feel overwhelmed by all the confusing medical terms being thrown at them, so they tend to sit back and do as the doctor says. Healthcare professionals sometimes take advantage of this fact and withhold important information from their patients. For instance, a study conducted by Lisa Lezzoni, MD, and her peers states that more than half of physicians lied to their patients about their diagnosis to put a more positive spin on it (Lezzoni, Rao, DesRoches, Vogeli, and Campbell). Healthcare professionals should disclose to the patient any information pertaining to the patient.

The ethical footing in the professional-patient relationship, is vulnerable and requires protection. In Case 2: Nondisclosure of Prostate Cancer, truth-telling is selective. Why would a doctor be justified in lying to his patient? Doctors usually filter out, all sorts of information they deem irrelevant. In this case, the doctor lied to his patient. The doctor based this on the patient’s history of psychiatric disease. The more true information I have, the better I understand my position, and the more able I will be to make sensible judgments about what to do next.Dishonesty can consist of saying something, staying silent, doing something, or doing nothing at all. A healthcare professional to mislead a patient must constitute a violation of that patient’s autonomy. Patients don’t know how the body preforms in health and disease, which causes inaccurate ideas of what’s going on.

Everything discussed between a doctor and patient has to be confidential. This means whatever the patient tells the GP, the GP is then not allowed to go and discuss this with other people. If a GP was to break this right then they are disrespecting the rights of the patient and there could be consequences for the GP. However sometimes it is difficult for a GP to keep that confidentiality if he thinks the patient is in any danger, for example a GP has been told in confidence by a vulnerable elderly women that her carer has hit her, the GP would either try and persuade his patient to tell someone about the incident or he could contact social services to make a safeguarding referral. Doctors should respect the patients wishes and keep the confidentiality

Critical Discussion In Should Doctors Tell the Truth, Collins’ believes that every physician should not tell patients the truth. I disagree with Collin’s argument because I am going to argue that physician’s should be ethical and tell the truth to their patients. Collins’ reasons for his argument come from is two premises which are that patients do not want to hear the truth, and if someone does not want the truth then you should not force it on them. My reasons for my counter-argument come from my premises which are that patients want to her the truth, and telling the truth is being ethical.

In this situation, the choice the doctor makes is vital. Whether or not he tells the patient his condition will not change the patient's condition, it will remain the same. In “A Small Good Thing” the Weiss was on the opposite side of this dilemma, their child was in an accident and they were told everything was fine when it was not. The Weisses were told numerous time that the child was “okay” or that he is likely to survive when in reality he was fighting for his life. In this situation, the Weiss were lied to so that they would not be

Retaining information from anyone in the medical field can be beneficial, and also detrimental depending on the situation. In the 1950s, doctors thought it was acceptable to keep information from patients, especially, the poor black population. The “paradox benevolent deception” was a “common practice” among Henrietta’s doctors at John Hopkins. The biggest misconception she endured was, “Henrietta asked her doctor when she’d be better so she could have another child…until that moment, she didn’t know the treatment left her infertile” (Skloot, 47). At the time, African Americans were uneducated, and doctors failed to take the time to explain certain medical terminology. Doctors conceal information from their patients because they believe it

There is an urban legend about graduate medical education where physicians are advised to consider it an underestimation when patients report they consume four drinks per week; medical residents should consider it eight. Likewise, patients deceive doctors about cigarette and illegal drug use. The not-so-subtle message underlying the practice: patients lie.

A practice commonly used in the medical field, “benevolent deception” is the act of physicians suppressing information about diagnoses in hopes of not causing patients emotional turmoil (Skloot 63). Benevolent deception is a contentious subject because when used, the bioethical principles of respect for autonomy and beneficence can conflict with each other. Respect for autonomy is when physicians acknowledge their patients’ abilities to make voluntary decisions on their own regarding their health care (McCormick 4). Meanwhile, beneficence is the duty of doctors to be of a benefit to patients, while also taking measures to prevent and remove harm from them (McCormick 5). When giving patients diagnoses, physicians need to follow these

Kipnis contemplates the significance of legal vs ethical duties medical professionals have to their clients. He sides with the need for confidentiality without condition. If conditions exist that make it possible for private information about a patient to be shared with a third party, that patient needs to be informed of this prior to treatment before information is gathered. Kipnis believes the outcome of this would result in two possible groups of people. One is the patient who would disclose information to a third party either doing it themselves or by allowing the professional to do so for them. The second group would be patients not willing to be open and honest with details when they do not wish to have them known. He reasons that if the patient knows that whatever they tell a professional is unconditionally confidential then they are more likely to be forthcoming and honest with details they might otherwise not be. The patient might not tell details necessary for proper diagnosis and treatment or they may not follow through with treatment at all. If the professional has no idea that a third party may need protection, knowledge of the potential threat, at least gives the medical professional an opportunity to try to help or stop the potential injury from happening using means that stop short of disclosing confidential information. Kipnis holds to the concept that the physician has a greater responsibility to

Confidentiality: This is a very important theory now in days with many people having their personal information stolen every year. Mostly for financial gain but sometimes also to get health care/treatment done. In regards to personal healthcare issues it just common sense to respect others and their privacy in such that one should not talk about a patients diagnosis or treatment other than with that patient or spouse. Sometimes people also keep things to themselves so they don’t bother or worry family members whatever the reasoning behind it, it is up to that patient to release info about themselves not the healthcare professional

Questions about truth and untruth in reality infest all human correspondence. They are brought up in families, clubs, work places, houses of worship, and even within healthcare. Honesty is very important to patients. Integrity of a healthcare professional is also very important to doctors and all healthcare professionals and jobs could be lost if doctors deceive and omit information to patients under any circumstance (Drane, n.d.). Regardless of any situation, at no time should a healthcare professional use deceit or dishonesty when caring for a

The original state of knowledge is truth. There is a clear negation in declaring that 'Dr. Smith is aware that that X is correct, even supposing X is false.' One may maintain to know or deem or find out that X is true, which is attuned with declaring that X is false. A query one may regard as then is: What is truth? There are those who consider Protagoras, a philosophical opponent of Socrates, that there are as a lot of interpretations of the notion of truth as there are people who declare that for some statement, X, is accurate for them. Some contemporary and modern supporters of Protagoras consequently say that truth is comparative.

Doctors think that they have the right not to tell the truth to their patients because of their paternalistic view. They point at patients’ misunderstanding of diagnosis because of the esoteric information and patients’ lacking of making best choices due to their illnesses or medicine to support this view. Although these are true, doctors just think for one side and they generalize it. To go into further detail, knowing the truth is a