Medical Confidentiality Argument Analysis

Medical confidentiality is a major issue in the medical field today due to consequences caused by keeping and breaking patient-doctor confidentiality. M. A. Crook addresses this issue in, “The Risks of Absolute Medical Confidentiality”, which discusses the holes in the argument that patient confidentiality should always be upheld. Crook presents detailed examples of scenarios in which confidentiality should have been broken and provides credible sources to support his opinion. Certain aspects of Crook’s argument enable it to be an overall well-written and persuasive article. Crook begins his argument by reviewing the definition of confidentiality. He states that confidentiality, in terms of patients and clinicians, is “a duty of confidence,

The first claim is that “Absolute confidentiality reduces harm within the doctor-patient relationship” (Crook 108). His summarization provides reasonable claims as to why confidentiality may be important to patients. Crook states that “patients may be reticent in disclosing information to their doctors, lie about or conceal embarrassing facts” (108). His statements in the first claim contradict his belief, but in order for readers to understand the claim he is arguing against, Crook needs to explain both sides. Explaining both sides of the overall argument of confidentiality allows readers to understand both opinions and decide whether or not Crook provides reasonable evidence to contradict his opposing

His examples include problems with confidentiality causing harm to public health and not actually benefiting the doctor-patient relationship. For example, Crook speaks of a time in which doctors were not able to find patients in a hospital because managers would not show the names of patients above their beds. He asserts, “This is potentially an extremely dangerous governance situation as clinical staff need to correctly and quickly and access patients” (Crook 111). It’s almost impossible for a doctor to disagree with this statement because it uses hard evidence and makes perfect