In this paper, I will argue that Dr. M, a surgeon infected with HIV, should inform his patients about his condition. By not doing so he is putting his patients at risk of contracting the disease and he is ignoring the Hippocratic oath that goes against his ethics as a physician he swore to uphold. When medical students go on to become a physician they are usually sworn into upholding the Hippocratic oath. The oath requires physicians to act so as to benefit the sick and keep them from harm. This oath is giving effective rules and virtues that guide a physician in how they should perform when it comes to their professional relationship with patient and others. Physicians are seen as altruistic individuals that would do everything in their …show more content…
M were not to tell his patients at all and they did get infected those patients could infect others which leads to more infections. Dr. M could believe that by not telling his patients that he is keeping them out of harm. In the mindset of an act utilitarian this would lead to a decrease in the overall happiness. The Hippocratic oath goes on to say that a physician has “certain duties like protection of confidentiality, avoiding abortion and not harming the patient.” This is the oath urging those who swear by it to be a good person and a virtuous physician. In our society we have laws, rules and principles that assure a level of moral conduct to physicians who plan to go through with this type of action. However, these few rules that give an idea of what a physician should do when it comes to certain scenarios is not sufficient in providing what to do in complex and unpredictable circumstances of decision making. It is understandable that “when the choice of a right and good action becomes more difficult, when the temptations to self-interest are more insistent” (72). Professional codes must be more explicit about the relationships between duties, rights, and virtues; a more honest relationship between physicians and …show more content…
M should tell his patients that he has HIV. Although the doctor may feel that it his business to keep, if he is putting his patients in danger he should make them aware of his condition. Of course, he would be covered during his surgeries but if an incident were to take place where he infects a patient there would be major scrutiny for the doctor. In the mind of the doctor it would be seen as an accident but you can never take back the health of a patient that has a virus that attacks their own body, which can rack up expenses due to the costs of the medicine needed to keep the virus at bay. I believe that the doctor should open up to his patients, by doing that he would lose some but he would also gain their respect and he would be letting his patients know that he keeps nothing from him and that their trust in him is key. The doctor could let his patients know that he is taking extra precautions to ensure that he will not infect his patients. By Dr. M coming forward about his illness he could set off a wave that allows other doctors who may have been hiding an even worse disease from their patients, the courage of the doctor would help doctors see that there is need to withhold information from a patient. A doctor’s main focus is to anything within his or her power to ensure that his patient is alive and well, if Dr. M were to keep this type of information from his patients he would be going against an oath that was created by those
According to Terrence F. Ackerman, as of the 1980s the American Medical Association had to include the respect for a person’s autonomy as a principle of medical ethics (Ackerman 14, 1982). This includes having the physician provide all the medical information to the patient even if the information could cause negative implication onto the patient. The physician is also expected to withhold all information of the patient from 3rd parties (Ackerman 14, 1982). Although it is seen as standard in today’s world, in
One day while doing his job, a physician used a used swab that was possibly infected with HIV on another patient. When looked at by certain people, the doctor did the correct thing by telling his patient that he roused a swab on him/her. However, the chances of this patient getting HIV was substantially low, and he should have waited for the patient to develop symptoms, which would have been rare, before telling the truth. As stated by Michael Greenberg, “he might have done better by keeping his mouth shut.” If the doctor did lie, he could have lied to protect himself, the quality of life of the patient, and his ability to help others with their lives. If he had not told the patient that he used the swab on him/her, he/she would not have had to live in fear of getting HIV. Because of this decision of truth telling, the doctor lost his job, money, confidence, and also affected someone’s quality of life.
One of the most complex, ever-changing careers is the medical field. Physicians are not only faced with medical challenges, but also with ethical ones. In “Respect for Patients, Physicians, and the Truth”, by Susan Cullen and Margaret Klein, they discuss to great extent the complicated dilemmas physicians encounter during their practice. In their publication, Cullen and Klein discuss the pros and cons of disclosing the medical diagnosis (identifying the nature or cause of the disease), and the prognosis (the end result after treating the condition). But this subject is not easily regulated nor are there guidelines to follow. One example that clearly illustrates the ambiguity of the subject is when a patient is diagnosed with a serious, life-threatening
He wrote the first complete medical books, called, Hippocratic Corpus, a collection of approximately 70 different works that described his medical theories and practices (“Hippocrates”, 1998). He also created the Hippocratic Oath, a document that outlines the ethics and morals of medicine. Although not in their original forms, both Hippocratic Corpus and the Hippocratic Oath are used today. During commencement, graduating medical students around the United States recite a modernized version of the Hippocratic Oath. This oath upholds physicians to the ethical code of medicine, allowing the patient to receive the best possible medical care.
Twenty four centuries ago, Hippocrates created the profession of medicine, for the first time in human history separating and refining the art of healing from primitive superstitions and religious rituals. His famous Oath forged medicine into what the Greeks called a technik, a craft requiring the entire person of the craftsman, an art that, according to Socrates in his dialogue Gorgias, involved virtue in the soul and spirit as well as the hands and brain. Yet Hippocrates made medicine more than a craft; he infused it with an intrinsic moral quality, creating a “union of medical skill and the integrity of the person [physician]” (Cameron, 2001).
As a junior in high school, I am considering medicine as a possible career choice. Through my research in this field, I discovered the Hippocratic Oath. The Hippocratic Oath is the most famous of the Hippocratic documents; it has served as an ideal for the professional attitude and ethics of physicians to the present; the historical origin of the oath is so obscure that even the date of its composition is placed from the 6th to the 1st century B.C.
Based on them, we can definitely eliminate options (c) and (d). Option (c) is against the principle of veracity and informed consent because the doctor was lying and hiding the information about the patient’s health that the patient was supposed to know. Option (d) is morally incorrect because the patient is lied to and the surgeon is not penalized. Option (b) does abide by the principle of veracity, but is against rationality because it sets negative example for the community that the doctors can be forgiven for their mistakes. Moreover, it does not abide by stewardship because the surgeon is taking advantage of being a doctor to conceal the truth. Consequently, the morally correct decision would be the option (a) because it abides by the principles of veracity and informed consent as the responsibility of disclosing the truth to the patient is fulfilled. Moreover, considering the rationality and stewardship, it will set an example for all the doctors that incomplete disclosure of information to the patient is unacceptable and the doctors should not take advantage of their importance in the
Doctors are well respected within the realm of American society and are perceived with the highest regard as a profession. According to Gallup’s Honesty and Ethics in Profession polls, 67% of respondents believe that “the honesty and ethical standards” of medical doctors were “very high.” Furthermore, 88% of respondents polled by Harris Polls considered doctors to either “hold some” or a “great deal of prestige”. Consequently, these overwhelmingly positive views of the medical profession insinuate a myth of infallibility that envelops the physicians and the science they practice. Atul Gawande, in Complications: A Surgeon’s Notes on an Imperfect Science, provides an extensive view of the medical profession from both sides of the operating table
Providers must act in the best interest of the patient and their basic obligation is to do no harm and work for the public’s wellbeing. A physician shall always keep in mind the obligation of preserving human life. Providers must communicate full, accurate and unbiased information so patients can make informed decisions about their health care. As a result of their recommendations, providers are responsible for generating costs in health care but do not generate the need for those expenses. Every hospital has both an ethical as well as a legal responsibility to provide care, even if the care may be uncompensated.
Professionalism is an adherence to a set of values comprising both a formally agreed-upon code of conduct and the informal expectations of colleagues, clients and society. The key values include acting in a patient's interest, responsiveness to the health needs of society, maintaining the highest standards of excellence in the practice of medicine and in the generation and dissemination of knowledge. In addition to medical knowledge and skills, medical professionals should present psychosocial and humanistic qualities such as caring, empathy, humility and compassion, as well as social responsibility and sensitivity to people's culture and beliefs. All these qualities are expected of members of highly trained professions.
Hippocratic Oath was earliest code of ethics to govern conduct in medicine. Unlike many modern professional codes, its intent was to describe a moral vision for members of the medical community rather than to protect members of the community from incurring on the law. This oath and AMA medical ethics are similar as the primary goal of both codes of ethics is to give full benefit to the
When one initially chooses a career path, one rarely looks at all the negatives that may be associated with that choice. Most career paths have some negatives associated with the field, but few face the moral dilemmas associated with modern healthcare. Those who choose to be in the healthcare profession today are faced with moral and ethical dilemmas that would make King Solomon tear his hair out. In many cases, doctors, and sometimes nurses, are faced with life and death decisions without the benefit of knowing the patient’s, or the patient’s family’s, wishes. However, aside from those tragic times when a patient’s wishes are unknown, healthcare professionals must always put their own morals aside, and act
In “Should Doctors Tell the Truth?” Joseph Collins argues for paternalistic deception, declaring that it is permissible for physicians to deceive their patients when it is in their best interests. Collins considers his argument from a “pragmatic” standpoint, rather than a moral one, and uses his experience with the sick to justify paternalistic deception. Collins argues that in his years of practicing, he has encountered four types of patients who want to know the truth: those that want to know so they know how much time they have left, those who do not want to know and may suffer if told the truth, those who are incapable of hearing the truth, and those who do not have a serious diagnosis (605). Collins follows with the assertion that the more serious the condition is, the less likely the patient is to seek information about their health (606).
Case 16 This case presents a very delicate situation that presents many legal and ethical questions. Do you tell your brother or partner he has HIV? I would tell my brother, but the how and when, may vary based on circumstances. From a professional ethical standpoint, it would be unethical to disclose the patient’s HIV status without consent.
Patient confidentiality is one of the foundations of the medical practice. Patients arrive at hospitals seeking treatment believing that all personal information will remain between themselves and the medical staff. In order to assure patients privacy, confidentiality policies were established. However, a confidentiality policy may be broken only in the case the medical staff believes that the patient is a danger to themselves or to others in society. Thesis Statement: The ethics underlying patient confidentiality is periodically questioned in our society due to circumstances that abruptly occur, leaving health professionals to decide between right and wrong.