If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
AIDS and Confidentiality
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
A woman in Australian has sucessfully sued her husband's doctor because he didn't tell her that the man was HIV+. She has now contracted the disease.
Story
So what does this mean for patient confidentiality? Would you be happy for your medical condition to be discussed with someone who might be affected by it?
Story
So what does this mean for patient confidentiality? Would you be happy for your medical condition to be discussed with someone who might be affected by it?
0
Comments
And I do think that in such cases where it is bound to affect others, then yes the partner does have a right to know.
I'd be so angry if such a thing happened to me under those circumstances.
Now the man should have told his wife, not the doctors, not to have done so is absolutly wrong.
Doctors have no right to discuss my healthcare with anyone (well, outside the NHS(and then they are covered by confidentiallity agreements)) unless I give consent.
Nope. Unless the patient is unconscious or not capable of making their own decisions...
Now this is much more localised but I do not see why the principle should be different.
perhaps the doctor could inform the patient that if they did not tell them in a certain time then they would tell them? Give them a chance to do it themselves?
do you think then that doctors should quarantine everyone with an infectious disease? every one with a STD? can you imagine the resource implications of that.
Health professional have a responsibility to prevent diseases, but that doesn't mean locking them away - thats what the victorians did. today health education and harm reduction play that role, along with socal responsiblity.
I defend the right of patient confidentiality, unless as MoK points out, they do not have the capacity to make decisions
the man should have told his wife, or left her, or took the right precautions.
Would you be happy for someone with the plague to go to a doctors be diagnosed and than allowed out to wander down the road because the doctor is not allowed to tell anyone he ahs because of confidentiality?
There is a major difference here. For diseases like plague/SARS the law allows for the Govt to quarantine patients to protect the public at large, this being because of the nature of those diseases.
Unless you are suggesting that AIDS patients should be quarantined or made to wear a yellow star to identify?*
*Rhetorical question
Put it this way, how many people would consult their doctor in the first place if they thought that the conversation would be repeated elsewhere?
I don't suggest everyone be told if someone has a potentially infectious disease, only those who are likely to be directly at risk, in this case the guys wife, surely the doctor has the same duty to protect the others, but as above I suggest that the person be given a chance to tell their partner but it can't be guaranteed can it?
If I thought I had a disease and I new the only person the doctor would tell was my girlfriend than of course i would still go because i would tell them anyway. In the case of the guy who didn't tell his partner (because he had an affair?) then i would imagine they would still go through self interest seeing as it is a selfish act anyway..........
Maybe Doctors should encourage anyone with AIDS to be open about their condition to anyone they're sleeping with, as part of counselling. Look at cases in the past where people have contracted AIDS from those who lied to them and sued. People shouldn't be able to pass on AIDS through their own irresponsibility, deceitfulness and selfishness.
AIDS is a serious problem now though, so everything should be done to cease the spread of it. But I don't think that a Doctor has the right to intervene without at least consulting the patient first.
I don't want to be too pedantic, but HIV and AIDS are quite different things, for one you don't catch AIDS
people with any health condition shouldn't have to be open about their health status - that would only re-enforce narrow minded bigoted prejudices, stereotypes, malic, hate, disgust, etc
people who are HIV+ve should have a responsibility to those they are intimate/close with, BUT this does not have to mean disclosing whether or not they have a certain illness/condition.
If you knew your friend was HIV+ and they were still having unprotected sex with theri wife, wouldn't you tell her?
The issue is differetn with health professionals I know but why is the principle different from seeking to prevent the spread of a highly infectious disease by informing those who are at risk, this is and will be done and rightly so..........
The people they inform would be bound by the same confidentiality that the doctors are. Hence why doctors, nurses and other health professionals can discuss patient's cases.
Even if the press were informed, no names would be given out... just as there wasn't for the UK's SARS case...
of course not. *
but as I said someone with HIV has responsibilities to those they are intimate with. I would encourage them to either not have sex, use protection and most importantly to tell her - and I would probably nag them until they did.
what kind of relationship can you have with someone based on secrets and lies
*I admit this is a very difficult argument, my thoughts come from hypothetical experience, if i was in the situation myself then I supect I would answer differently, but as a health professional I am still bound by professional confidentiallity and this carries through into other aspects of my life.
Well assuming you are good friends with the wife as well wouldn't the same apply to your relationship with her?
keeping to such a code is nice in theory but i see nothing wrong with pragmattical as you admit. If you know you can help someone then why not?
The loss of that persons confidentiality which will happen at some point is far less than saving asomeone from catching a harmful illness surely?
MoK: That is true of the public but obviously the close family would have known, you aren't going to behave like you haven't got it when you are quarantined. In that situation knowledge is unavoidable but i am not srue it changes the principle of protecting people, isn't that a more important principle than confidentiality?
yes in relaity I would want to see as little harm done as possible and would work every means possible to make sure the partner wasn't infected, breaking their confidence would have to be the very last resort.
on a practical note, I may well know if my freinds sleep together, but as to it being unprotected sex ... I don't normally get that much detail, (not like this place
I agree that it should be a last resort only, I am gald you agree in principle and in reality.............:)
*bows in submission*
thanks, these things are difficult, so its good to bash them out while we are safe, comfortable and relativley unchallenged
see you tomorrow
My uni term has finished and I am heading back to leicester tomorrow so i may only be online very sporadically over the next 3 months.
In case I don't get to come on tomorrow, tara everyone hope you have a nice summer..........:)
I know there is a difference. I only glanced at the subject and in my hurry I put AIDS instead of HIV. Well although they're different, they are both life-threatening and HIV can develop into AIDS.
There is a stigma attached to HIV and AIDS and this needs to be overcome. It's the prejudiced people that need to change their attitudes and I believe more education and more openess towards the issue may reduce it.
I'm not saying people parade around with t-shirts saying "HIV+" or "I have AIDS" or introducing themselves as a sufferer, but they should be open with close ones. For it will cause problems. If a someone found out their partner was hiding that they would be devastated and feel betrayed. They can use their status positively by educating and warning other people, they've got to be the most influential people in the fight against the spread of HIV.
You generally have to DO something to get HIV/AIDS. Sufferers deserve anything they get.
wtf? so his wife deserved it??????????
So if your partner lies to you and doesn't tell you they are HIV positive and you contract it, you deserve it?
So if you're raped by someone with HIV, you deserve it?
So if you have a blood transfusion and the blood is contaminated, you deserve it?
Well most people with AIDS do so due to their own reckless behaviour. Society's 'prejudice' against HIV/AIDS sufferers is a logical one.
So in South Africa the pandemic of AIDS is decimating the population, so any AIDS sufferer there, by your definition, is a reckless idiot yes?
Do you actually view the world in such a black and white way?
People in Africa knowingly have sex with no contraception. A simple 'mistake' is not relevant here.
But those in Africa generally possess no information regarding HIV. In the UK, MOST should know the dangers of the disease and how to contract it. The government have been delivering the message for almost twenty years!!! In general, a person in Britain has no excuse in not knowing that sex without contraception can lead to acquiring AIDS.
Take the couple in question, they BOTH went for tests for Sexually Transmitted Disease, obviously they went as a couple she was clear and he was found to be H.I.V. So when the results came in WHY was she not told about it?
When they had the tests being a couple they both should have been called to see the doctor and told the results, not just the fella getting told he was H.I.V
I think that she was right to sue, her doctor was obviously treating her by giving her a STD test, when he found the results of hers were negative but her boyfriends proved to be H.I.V he being the doctor looking after the womans health and well being should have told her about her boyfriends results, bearing in mind her risk of the infection if she had unprotected sex with the guy could lead to her catching the same thing.
Im all for confidentiality, but when that confidentiality means a partner is at risk they need to be told.