Why Medical Practitioners Should Be Mandatory

Overall, both sides of the argument make very valid points when it comes to patient/partner confidentiality, autonomy, and the moral obligation of the individuals who willing know that they are infected with HIV/AIDS to tell their sexual partner. As stated before, I firmly believe that any individual who engages in sexual activity with a partner are ethically and morally obligated to tell them if they are aware that they are in fact carrying the HIV/AIDS virus. To me, this is a very important aspect to help in the prevention and control of the deadly epidemic of the HIV/AIDS virus. Quite simply put, “the individual who knows that he is HIV seropositive or who has reason to believe that he may be, has a moral duty to forewarn prospective partners of his HIV status and is responsible for their fate if he does not” (Erin & Harris,

Seeing information about a healthcare user in such terms makes me realise that some information is not necessarily in the public domain and therefore I have a privilege and responsibility to not only care for the patient but also for the knowledge about them that I am privy to. I realise that, although I have a duty to retain confidentiality, I may be placed in a position where the confidence has to also include other healthcare professionals and I need to involve the patient in such a situation (ibid).

In the medical field or any other professions, privacy is paramount. One of the most important things is confidentiality. In this case, patients should be able to trust that they treating physicians will not disclose their personal information to other parties without their consent. The question then becomes: Under what circumstances is it alright for physicians to disclose private medical information to third party without informed consent? Did Dr. Shapiro have the right to disclose Mr. Lovington’s private medical information to his wife Anna, who is also his patient?

In fact the government should not be allowed to reveal any information about you, such as with doctor patient confidentiality unless it is of national security or of a certain nature of crime.

Health care professionals are subject to a multitude of professional, legal, and ethical responsibilities which call for personal judgment to be utilized in such a manner as to protect clients as well as public wellness and interests. Overall considerations in handling such duties may be considered to be respect of a client’s autonomy, confidence, and recognition of obligations owed to all clients. While the aforementioned acts fall within the professional realm, there are also legal implications that guide care. Therefore, it can be said that ethical considerations occur in observation of legal responsibilities. Confidential information is perceived as private facts which are disclosed with the

But when those involved in these legitimate activities make demands that seem inappropriate, the records must be protected. Disclosure of personal medical information should also be subject to patients’ or families’ consent (Richmond et al. 2009).

“Professional integrity derives its substance from the fundamental goals or mission of the profession” (Wakin, 1996, para. 15). Meaning to say, individuals seek for a professional’s valued and ethical advice to which the professional holds their responsibility to maintain and exceeds the level of their expertise. For example, a general practitioner will treat a variety of patients, from all different walks of life with a plethora of different problems. It is their duty to diagnose and treat the patient to the best of their professional ability without prejudice. Another aspect of their duties is the principle of patient confidentiality. Medical professionals are legally bound to not divulge any information provided to them by their patients.

Although confidentiality is considered to be of great importance in therapeutic relationship, one must not assume it to be independent. In particular, confidentiality ought to be compromised whenever it conflicts with a higher moral value, such as the duty to safeguard human life. Most often physicians do not know if to disclose the HIV status of their patients to known contacts or if failure to do so may give rise to liability if the known contact becomes HIV positive. This is one of the most controversial issues in reporting and partner notification

An example of a competing priority when the good of society is favored over the good of an individual is the reporting of HIV/AIDS related information without permission of the infected individual. Health care providers are permitted to disclose an individual's HIV information to any individual at risk without lawful penalty (Gostin, Ward, & Baker, 1997). Many healthcare providers believe this could help decrease the number of cases, but to patients this could be dehumanizing. Medical records of HIV/AIDS patients are handled differently than communicable diseases, because of the sensitivity of related information. Once individuals report their condition to health care providers, they are required to report their names to other officials. I

Privacy and confidentiality are basic rights in our society. Safeguarding those rights, with respect to an individual’s personal health information, is our ethical and legal obligation as health care providers. Doing so in today’s health care environment is increasingly challenging (OJIN, 2005).

The confidentiality of patient visits and medical records are essential in providing the highest quality of health care. Under penalty of law, a patient's medical records or any other information regarding the patient may only be released with his or her authorization. Exceptions to this are certain cases specified by law for example, health care providers are required to report certain communicable diseases such as measles. Many organizations and laws have been developed to maintain patient's rights of confidentiality and access to their medical record. Guided by the principle that confidentiality is essential in developing strong trust between patients and healthcare providers, the

Many individuals are afraid to get tested for HIV and are afraid of the stigma associated with HIV when disclosing their status to partners. They are often subject to their own psychological and other social stress which often hinders appropriate management of the infection. This is not always without reason as disclosure of an HIV status can lead to exclusion from ones family, friend-circle or dismissal from the workplace. However disclose to a family member, partner or friend can provide psychological and later physical support. Also the fear of individuals they love finding out that they are HIV positive may lead to anxiety or isolation. Non-disclosure can often affect healthcare and management of the persons’ disease as the fear of dependents finding out will require the individual to hide taking the medication and use personal funds to pay for treatment to avoid the medical insurance company from informing co-dependants (Alonzo & Renolds 1995).

Mr. A’s statement reflects the need for further education about HIV transmission. The nurse should inform Mr. A that HIV is primarily spread through unprotected sexual intercourse and by sharing contaminated needles for intravenous drug use. Individuals engaging in risky sexual behaviors (e.g. unprotected anal intercourse) are at highest risk for contracting HIV, regardless of sexual orientation. The nurse

In medicine one of the things every patient is entitled to, no matter what, is their privacy. Since ancient times the privacy between a doctor and a patient has been somewhat of sacred thing. The patient has the right to release their health information to whomever they please. Even for doctors to access a patient’s medical history there has to be consent from the patient. In Mair’s article she reports about the case PD v Harvey in which PD upon asking for her future husband’s (FH) HIV test results was denied access because of lack of consent from FH. FH because of his right to confidentiality, despite having the disease, was able to lie and forge a pathology report which reported his HIV status as negative and in turn PD was lead to believe that FH actually received a negative result. If PD had been allowed the right to view the positive result or maybe even if the doctors would have taken into consideration her well-being PD could have avoided being infected (2009). Before testing a patient for HIV/AIDS a doctor should consult the patient in this consultation the patient should be educated about the disease, the testing process, and actions to be taken upon a positive result, including disclosure to sexual

States are required to adopt this policy or its "equivalent." Because the government has taken a flexible view on "equivalency," there is wide variation in state law and not all states require disclosure of HIV infection by health care workers. Those who favor the federal policy argue that disclosure of health care worker HIV infection is necessary to meet the obligation of informed consent. They also argue that the health care workers ' obligations to act in patients ' best interests also mandate disclosure of HIV infection and, in some cases, restrictions on clinical activities. Those who are against the federal policy argue that such disclosure or restrictions are inappropriate because they violate health care workers ' privacy and because the risks to health care workers, for example from discrimination, far outweigh the benefits to patients, given that the risk of infection from a seropositive health care worker is very small. Some have suggested that the federal policy should be revised in light of the data demonstrating that the risks of transmission in the health care setting are exceedingly low.