A challenge to unqualified medical confidentiality.

Medical personnel sometimes face a seeming conflict between a duty to respect patient confidentiality and a duty to warn or protect endangered third parties. The conventional answer to dilemmas of this sort is that, in certain circumstances, medical professionals have an obligation to breach confidentiality. Kenneth Kipnis has argued, however, that the conventional wisdom on the nature of medical confidentiality is mistaken. Kipnis argues that the obligation to respect patient confidentiality is unqualified or absolute, since unqualified policies can save more lives in the long run. In this paper, I identify the form of Kipnis's argument and present a challenge to it. I conclude that, as matters stand now, a qualified confidentiality policy is the more rational choice.

An International Comparative Study on Driving Regulations on People with Dementia.

Over 40% of people with dementia drive, with a two to five times greater accident risk than controls. This has fueled public concerns about the risk of traffic accidents by drivers with dementia (DWD). We compared driving regulations on seniors and DWD between ten European and Asia-Pacific countries to identify key implications for national strategies. Moderate to severe dementia was a reason for driver's license revocation in all countries. However, regulations on mild dementia varied considerably, with most basing their decisions on severity, rather than simply the presence of dementia. Most used validated assessments, but responsibility for triggering the administrative process fell on drivers in some countries and on physicians in others. Administrations should consider the following when developing driving policies: 1) ideal regulations on DWD should ensure that restrictions are implemented only when needed; 2) fitness to drive should be assessed using validated instruments; 3) the use of processes that automatically initiate driving competency examinations following a diagnosis of dementia should be explored; and 4) restrictions should be delicately tailored to a range of driving competence levels, and assistive incentives compensating for lost driving privileges should be provided.

The Double Helix: Applying an Ethic of Care to the Duty to Warn Genetic Relatives of Genetic Information.

Genetic testing reveals information about a patient's health status and predictions about the patient's future wellness, while also potentially disclosing health information relevant to other family members. With the increasing availability and affordability of genetic testing and the integration of genetics into mainstream medicine, the importance of clarifying the scope of confidentiality and the rules regarding disclosure of genetic findings to genetic relatives is prime. The United Nations International Declaration on Human Genetic Data urges an appreciation for principles of equality, justice, solidarity and responsibility in the context of genetic testing, including a commitment to honoring the privacy and security of the person tested. Considering this global mandate and recent professional statements in the context of a legal amendment to patient privacy policies in Australia, a fresh scrutiny of the legal history of a physician's duty to warn is warranted. This article inquiries whether there may be anything ethically or socially amiss with a potential future recommendation for health professionals or patients to universally disclose particular cancer predisposition genetic diagnosis to genetic family members. While much of the discussion remains applicable to all genetic diagnosis, the article focuses on the practice of disclosure within the context of BRCA1/2 diagnosis. An 'ethic of care' interpretation of legal tradition and current practice will serve to reconcile law and medical policy on the issue of physician disclosure of genetic results to family members without patient consent.

Effect of a legal prime on clinician's assessment of suicide risk.

The present study evaluates how liability influences mental health clinicians' assessment of suicide risk. In this online vignette-based experiment, clinicians (N = 268) were either primed with a legal standard prior to a case vignette or presented the case vignette alone. Clinicians then rated the patient's likelihood of suicide and need for hospitalization. Results indicated that trainees provided significantly lower ratings of suicide risk following presentation of the legal standard, but this was not associated with hospitalization endorsement. Results have training and legal implications for improving the accuracy of suicide risk assessment in both trainees and licensed professionals.

[Duties of physicians or other healthcare workers connected with diagnosis, treatment, dissemination of information, assessment and registration of TB patients]. / Prawne obowiazki lekarza oraz innych pracowników sluzby zdrowia zwiazane z diagnostyka, leczeniem, informowaniem, orzekaniem i rejestracja chorych na gruzlice.

Effective laws provide a series of duties to be performed by physicians and other medical personnel associated with TB. Every TB case and death resulting from TB as well as any case of undesirable result of BCG test requires notification and filling in of a special form. The physician has a duty to inform TB patients their legal guardians, close relatives or friends about the need to undergo sanitary and diagnostic procedure, treatment or vaccination, as well as on how to prevent disease from spreading. Persons failing to comply with the relevant numerous legal requirements in this respect are subject to a fine.TB patients can use special sick benefits extending up to 270 days. There is a requirement to use appropriate codes to define TB irrespective of LCD-10 classification.

Collectivizing rescue obligations in bioethics.

Bioethicists invoke a duty to rescue in a wide range of cases. Indeed, arguably, there exists an entire medical paradigm whereby vast numbers of medical encounters are treated as rescue cases. The intuitive power of the rescue paradigm is considerable, but much of this power stems from the problematic way that rescue cases are conceptualized-namely, as random, unanticipated, unavoidable, interpersonal events for which context is irrelevant and beneficence is the paramount value. In this article, I critique the basic assumptions of the rescue paradigm, reframe the ethical landscape in which rescue obligations are understood, and defend the necessity and value of a wider social and institutional view. Along the way, I move back and forth between ethical theory and a concrete case where the duty to rescue has been problematically applied: the purported duty to regularly return incidental findings and individual research results in genomic and genetic research.

Attitudes of physicians and patients towards disclosure of genetic information to spouse and first-degree relatives: a case study from Turkey.

BACKGROUND: When considering the principle of medical confidentiality, disclosure of genetic information constitutes a special case because of the impact that this information can have on the health and the lives of relatives. The aim of this study is to explore the attitudes of Turkish physicians and patients about sharing information obtained from genetic tests. METHODS: The study was carried out in Kocaeli, Turkey. Participants were either paediatricians and gynaecologists registered in Kocaeli, or patients coming to the genetic diagnosis centre for karyotype analysis in 2008. A self-administered paper questionnaire was given to the physicians, and face-to-face structured interviews were conducted with patients. We used a case study involving a man who was found to be a balanced chromosome carrier as a result of a test conducted after his first baby was born with Down's syndrome. However, he refused to share this information with his wife or his siblings. Percentages of characteristics and preferences of the participants were calculated, and the results were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: A total of 155 physicians (68% response rate) and 104 patients (46% response rate) were participated in the study. Twenty-six percent of physicians and 49% of patients believed that genetic information belongs to the whole family. When participants were asked with whom genetic information should be shared for the case study, most of the physicians and patients thought the physician should inform the spouse (79%, 85%, respectively). They were less likely to support a physician informing a sibling (41%, 53%, respectively); whereas, many thought the testee has an obligation to inform siblings (70%, 94%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although Turkey's national regulations certainly protect the right of privacy of the testee, the participants in our study appear to believe that informing the spouse, who is not personally at risk of serious damage, is the physician's responsibility, while informing siblings, is the testee's responsibility. Therefore we believe that opening ethical discussions with clinicians about the sharing of genetic information, establishing guidelines for practice and sharing these guidelines and the reasons behind them with the wider population, will help to pre-empt ethical dilemmas.

Prevalence and public health implications of state laws that criminalize potential HIV exposure in the United States.

For the past three decades, legislative approaches to prevent HIV transmission have been used at the national, state, and local levels. One punitive legislative approach has been enactment of laws that criminalize behaviors associated with HIV exposure (HIV-specific criminal laws). In the USA, HIV-specific criminal laws have largely been shaped by state laws. These laws impose criminal penalties on persons who know they have HIV and subsequently engage in certain behaviors, most commonly sexual activity without prior disclosure of HIV-positive serostatus. These laws have been subject to intense public debate. Using public health law research methods, data from the legal database WestlawNext© were analyzed to describe the prevalence and characteristics of laws that criminalize potential HIV exposure in the 50 states (plus the District of Columbia) and to examine the implications of these laws for public health practice. The first state laws were enacted in 1986; as of 2011 a total of 67 laws had been enacted in 33 states. By 1995, nearly two-thirds of all laws had been enacted; by 2000, 85 % of laws had been enacted; and since 2000, an additional 10 laws have been enacted. Twenty-four states require persons who are aware that they have HIV to disclose their status to sexual partners and 14 states require disclosure to needle-sharing partners. Twenty-five states criminalize one or more behaviors that pose a low or negligible risk for HIV transmission. Nearly two-thirds of states in the USA have legislation that criminalizes potential HIV exposure. Many of these laws criminalize behaviors that pose low or negligible risk for HIV transmission. The majority of laws were passed before studies showed that antiretroviral therapy (ART) reduces HIV transmission risk and most laws do not account for HIV prevention measures that reduce transmission risk, such as condom use, ART, or pre-exposure prophylaxis. States with HIV-specific criminal laws are encouraged to use the findings of this paper to re-examine those laws, assess the laws' alignment with current evidence regarding HIV transmission risk, and consider whether the laws are the best vehicle to achieve their intended purposes.

The physician's breach of the duty to inform the parent of deformities and abnormalities in the foetus: "wrongful life" actions, a new frontier of medical responsibility.

A recent decision of the Italian Highest Court for the first time legitimized wrongful life suits. The Court stated the following principles: (a) the contract between the mother and the doctor has also protective effects in favour of third parties (father, siblings and the disabled child) who have the right to be compensated; (b) the right to compensation is neither based on the right not to be born nor on the right to be born healthy, but rather it is based on the breach of duty of care which coincides with the child's disabled status; (c) siblings may suffer the reduced availability of their parents; (d) the doctor is held responsible for not providing full information to the mother about the foetal deformity. The Supreme Court once again emphasized the importance of information on the matter of very personal choices, such as termination of pregnancy in case of foetal malformations. In the present case, the gynaecologist breached the duty to inform, especially after the patient requested diagnostic tests designed to highlight any foetal malformations and informed the doctor of the possibility of an eventual subsequent termination of pregnancy if foetal malformations were found.

Conflictos de interés: tema para conocer e informar / Conflicts of interest: subject to know and report

El Instituto de Medicina de los Estados Unidos (Committee on Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice), en su declaración de 2009, define el conflicto de interés como "aquel que se produce cuando las circunstancias profesionales crean un riesgo en el cual los juicios o acciones particulares de una persona sean influenciados indebidamente por un interés secundario, principalmente financiero". Según el Comité Internacional de Editores de Revistas Médicas (CIERM), existe un conflicto de interés cuando un autor (o el centro al que este pertenece), revisor o editor tienen una relación económica o personal que influye de manera inapropiada (sesgo) en sus acciones. La colaboración entre la medicina académica y la industria (de medicamentos y dispositivos) ha permitido el desarrollo de infinidad de técnicas de diagnóstico y tratamiento que han contribuido significativamente a la mejora de la salud pública. La influencia de esta colaboración está sujeta a gran debate y es sometida a un riguroso examen por parte de la comunidad en general, debido a la percepción de que los resultados de algunos ensayos clínicos de alto impacto puedan ser influenciados por los conflictos de interés, principalmente financieros, por parte de los investigadores. En vista de que el costo de desarrollar un fármaco o un dispositivo con éxito es muy alto, y la logística de reclutamiento de pacientes así como el seguimiento son cada vez más difíciles, no se espera que la financiación gubernamental logre el reemplazo de los ensayos patrocinados por la industria. Por lo tanto, no es de extrañar que hasta el 75% de los ensayos clínicos con medicamentos sea financiado por la industria farmacéutica, y posiblemente la cifra sea mayor cuando se analizan los estudios relacionados con dispositivos.

The duty to disclose in Kenyan health facilities: a qualitative investigation of HIV disclosure in everyday practice.

Disclosure of HIV status is routinely promoted as a public health measure to prevent transmission and enhance treatment adherence support. While studies show a range of positive and negative outcomes associated with disclosure, it has also been documented that disclosing is a challenging and ongoing process. This article aims to describe the role of health-care workers in Central and Nairobi provinces in Kenya in facilitating disclosure in the contexts of voluntary counselling and testing and provider-initiated testing and counselling and includes a discussion on how participants perceive and experience disclosure as a result. We draw on in-depth qualitative research carried out in 2008-2009 among people living with HIV (PLHIV) and the health workers who provide care to them. Our findings suggest that in everyday practice, there are three models of disclosure at work: (1) voluntary-consented disclosure, in alignment with international guidelines; (2) involuntary, non-consensual disclosure, which may be either intentional or accidental; and (3) obligatory disclosure, which occurs when PLHIV are forced to disclose to access services at health facilities. Health-care workers were often caught between the three models and struggled with the competing demands of promoting prevention, adherence, and confidentiality. Findings indicate that as national and global policies shift to normalize HIV testing as routine in a range of clinical settings, greater effort must be made to define suitable best practices that balance the human rights and the public health perspectives in relation to disclosure.