Should a doctor tell the truth directly to the patient regardless of the family’s wishes not to do that? Or in contrast, should the doctor simply tell the truth to the patient prior to his or her family? Ruiping Fan and Benfu Li’s journal article primarily focuses on whether or not a physician should tell truth to the patient. From a personal opinion, patients have the right to know their state of health. To be honest with a patient, despite his or her family's wishes, before telling the family ultimately depends on many things, such as the patient's age, medical conditions and circumstances, and religious beliefs.
First of all, if the physician is talking with a middle-aged man about his state of health before talking with his family, the patient might result in depression, can regret or even feel the need to give up treatment. If the doctor is talking with an elderly patient about his or her condition, it is likely that the older patient will choose not to pursue the treatment because his or her life is lived and there is no purpose to agonize and hurt relatives in the process of treatment. A possible exception is if a doctor’s patient is a child. For a doctor, it is not necessarily important to be completely honest directly with the young patient without talking with family first. This is mainly because the child is not very educated to understand the severity of their condition or the potential outcomes. In addition, the child cannot make decisions independently. It is important for a physician to talk with a child’s parents or guardians prior to discussing the child’s condition with the child itself. This allows the physician be certain that after a diagnosis, the child will be less likely to be psychologically traumatized. ...
... middle of paper ...
...However, this just worsens the situation because the patient may unknowingly transmit the disease to others.
To conclude, I think that physicians should tell the truth directly to the patient, even against family requests. Yes, there are some exceptions, of which are associated to the patients’ age, disease, and religious beliefs that makes doctors respect family wishes. Ruiping Fan and Benfu Li say that Confucian Chinese practice encourage doctors to hide the truth from the patient if his or her family thinks that it should be hidden. They say that it “…is most important for one [patient] to know everything and make medical decisions by oneself, but to have the love and interdependence of family members” (pg. 71). In agreement, a patient is entitled to know his or her condition, despite family wishes, but should also receive the support and care from their family.
Truth in medicine is a big discussion among many medical professionals about how doctors handle the truth. Truth to a patient can be presented in many ways and different doctors have different ways of handling it. Many often believe that patient’s being fully aware of their health; such as a bad diagnosis, could lead to depression compared to not knowing the diagnosis. In today’s society doctor’s are expected to deliver patient’s the whole truth in order for patients to actively make their own health decisions. Shelly K. Schwartz discusses the truth in her essay, Is It Ever Ok to Lie to Patients?. Schwartz argument is that patients should be told the truth about their health and presented and addressed in a way most comfortable to the patient.
Cullen and Klein understand that deception is wrong and disrespectful to the patient but criticize that some cases are more complicated and not so black and white. They argue that physicians should be able to withhold information that can significantly benefit the patient. The key part is that the benefit is greater than what the deception causes.
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
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.
Should doctors tell the truth to their patients? How much information should the patient know about a certain ill or operation? These controversial questions are asked more frequently in our society. Patients nowadays,. are very sensitive to certain diseases more than before. This paper argues against telling the truth in doctor-patient relationship. Not by defending the idea directly but, by presenting first how truth can be harmful to the patient and by giving Higgs’ objection to it, then by giving my own objection to Higgs’ argument.
Without patient confidentiality, patients would not be willing to tell about themselves or their family member for fear of it getting out (tTelegraph). If they were asked
Including family members in the care of the patient helps them cope better with the patient’s illness and helps them plan ongoing care when the patient goes home. Gaining both the trust of the patient and family can help the health care team get any details that may have been missed on admission, such as medications the patient takes, or special diet, or spiritual needs. Also, the family may provide pertinent information that the patient may not have divulged to the nurse. Encouraging the patient and family to voice their concerns will help implement a safe plan of action.
Before beginning any treatment patients often have to consult their family beforehand to see how it will affect them (Galanti, 2002). One example of the above scenario is from Geri-Ann Galanti; there was a Hispanic women who needed to be put on insulin to control her diabetes; she left the clinic unsure if she was going to start insulin therapy because she needed to talk to her husband and son. The physician was irritated because he felt she didn’t understand the importance of insulin in keeping her blood sugar down (Galanti, 2002). However, the patient and her husband came back into the clinic the next day to talk about their concerns.
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).
“Because young children are not able to make complex decisions for themselves, the authority to make medical decisions on behalf of the child usually falls to the child’s parents” (Diekema 1). Sometimes it’s not that the child is will not make the most logical decisions, it’s just that parents are generally more cautious and think things through more. “Parents generally are better situated than others to understand the unique needs of their children, and to make appropriate, caring decisions regarding their children’s health care” (Diekema 1). Although the critic side presents many valid thoughts, the advocate side also presents thought-provoking statements that make the issue
The most common areas of clinical practice where truth-telling and deception become an ethical dilemma are critical care, cancer and palliative care, mental health and general nursing practice (Tuckett, 2004). Other areas where it can raise potential ethical concerns are in placebo therapy, disclosure of human immunodeficiency virus and informed consent (Tuckett, 2004). Truth-telling is also an act of exchanging moral agents (patients, relatives, nurses) with their sets of values and norms, which in turn are derived from culture, personal and religious beliefs, and traditions (Dossa, 2010). For this reason, the issue of truth-telling is not only approached differently in the various clinical settings but also in different countries, cultures and religions (Kazdaglis et al., 2010). For example, in the United States of America (USA), England, Canada and Finland, the majority of patients are told of their diagnosis (Kazdaglis et al., 2010). Conversely, in Japan, family members play a major role in the decision of ...
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.
According to Veatch (p.68) “being Hippocratic to both patients simultaneously in impossible; if the physician believes it is in his patient’s best interest to know about his fiancé’s sexuality, he has a duty to tell her.” however I think confidentiality overrides the Hippocratic principle on this case. As a nurse I understand how it feels like to be in a dilemma, sometimes at work, It is frustrating when a family member who is involved in the care for their loved ones want information but I can divulge any pertinent information about the patient because they are not the patient's responsible party. All I can say to them is the patient will explain to you if it is a competent patient, if not I will refer them to the person is responsible for the patient.
My grandmother later returned to the U.S. with her children after separating from my grandfather and worked as home health aide. My grandmother was a controlled non-insulin dependent diabetic and eventually died of cancer. In order to avoid conflict as a result of her decision to refuse treatment, the type is unknown as she kept her diagnosis a secret. My grandfather worked as a carpenter until he retired and later died due to heart disease, the specifics are unknown. My father’s sisters are twins with one who died due to cardiac disease and the other who was recently diagnosed with diabetes. My father’s brother has no known health issues, does not see a physician regularly, and denies any signs and symptoms that would cause him to seek medical attention. My father, being a retired army veteran, has been diagnosed with hypertension which is controlled by lifestyle changes. My father visits a family physician often and attributes this to a habit acquired while in the army. It was noticed that the men on both sides of the family with the exception of my father rarely or never visited a family physician. This was noted to be due to cultural misconceptions about advanced healthcare professionals and reluctance to take
Patients rely on their physicians and other doctors, patients think or do what the doctor was right. Family doctor broke the minor patient confidentiality, without their permission. Minor patient 's family secret is broken, the patient can choose to stay away treatment.addition medical patient told the doctor, it seems disgusting and disclose sensitive personal information, do not tell their parents, then the doctor should not be counted. Patient doctors in private life and we will not collect information on the condition they use. When a child with your doctor about these issues doctors should not do, when the time the child is in danger, it is to tell the child 's family. Doctors suspect family problems, children at risk, the authorities may be notified. Sometimes they show that abortion is the best for her, and notify the parents may be dangerous. The right to disclose information under the background to avoid disclosure or "special relationship" obtained. "Special relations, including between doctors and patients, lawyers and clients, priest and penitent or confiders, guardians and their communities" ( "Doctor patient confidentiality"). Communication between patient and doctor is very important, usually including a doctor and other professionals work. Sometimes you need counseling and medical advice and family relationship breakdown when a minor patient 's medical crisis. Once the doctor has a duty of confidentiality, they