A moral question re: Doctor/Patient confidentiality

MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
OK…morals test #1

A Doctor has this patient. It’s a man who is about to get married. This man has an inoperable brain tumor which will kill him within 1 ½ years. He’s told his doctor that he has no plans to tell his future wife because he’s afraid that she’ll leave him and he wants to spend his last days on this earth with the woman he loves.

Doctor/patient confidentiality, right?

Now…the woman that this patient wants to marry is the doctor’s sister.

Should the doctor tell his sister?
Should he remain quiet?
What if he remains quiet and his sister finds out that he knew?
What if he tells his sister and the patient has his Dr’s license removed for it?

What would you do?
 
Kept confidentiallity, if he knew he couldn't kept it secret, he shouldn't have attended his soon-to-be brother inlaw in the first place.
 
MrBishop said:
Should the doctor tell his sister?
Click to expand...
ABSOLUTELY NOT
Should he remain quiet?
Click to expand...
yes
What if he remains quiet and his sister finds out that he knew?
Click to expand...
She should understand and respect his decision.
What if he tells his sister and the patient has his Dr’s license removed for it?
Click to expand...
It would serve him right.

What would you do?
Click to expand...
I would have referred him to a colleague in the first place. As a patient, I would never want to be treated or examined by a friend or family member.
 
What about during the ceremony itself?
"Is there any person present who knows of any reason why these two should not be lawfully married?"
 
Still doesn't matter Bish, Doctor/Patient confidentiality. Without it, everyone will know about those sores on your testicles, the hot wheel that was extracted out of your wifes ass, and every other gory detail of your personal medical history.
 
MrBishop said:
What about during the ceremony itself?
"Is there any person present who knows of any reason why these two should not be lawfully married?"
Click to expand...
What, pray tell, would be your 'lawful' argument?
 
Sorry Bish - didn't read it all, I'm still dumbfounded about finding a moral question at OTC. I used to just think that the only way morals would ever be discussed here was how questionable ours were ;)
 
I'm with the majority - doctor/patient confidentiality prevails. This is why we don't treat with people we know closely, because such confidentiality might be abused.
 
Easy one.....

1. He should never have treated the patient because of the pending relationship.

2. Having treated the patient, the Doctor/Patient confidentiality supercedes ALL else.
 
i wouldn't tell...but you can bet your paycheck i wouldn't refrain from telling him what a schmuck i think he was and how much respect i had lost for him by his callous handling of his futures wife's feelings. what a bastard.
 
Ok Bish, if you think the Doctor/Patient privelege is not completely infallible, how about the Priest/Confessor? As it stands, a priest may not repeat what he hears in confession to anyone. Even if the person confesses to killing another priest, or molesting children, he has to keep his mouth shut. Should he?
 
PuterTutor said:
Ok Bish, if you think the Doctor/Patient privelege is not completely infallible, how about the Priest/Confessor? As it stands, a priest may not repeat what he hears in confession to anyone. Even if the person confesses to killing another priest, or molesting children, he has to keep his mouth shut. Should he?
Click to expand...

Actually...in this case, there are conons to deal with this. Let's say that a priest confessed to another that he's been playing with the altar boys...the Canon about disclosure supercedes the priest/client confidentiality. Said priest goes to tribunal. Same goes for murder...the priest that hears about the murder goes to his bishop with the info (Still confidential under the confidentiality canon) and tells him. The decision goes to the Bishop to disclose or not.

There are always loopholes...privacy vs. the life of another.
 
unclehobart said:
What, pray tell, would be your 'lawful' argument?
Click to expand...

We're talking about church and state laws... marriage is meant to be an open relationship without secrets. If this particular secret would harm the relationship in the long run, then it should come out or be forgotten. Let's say (just to piss off Prof), that the man was gay for years and then decides to marry a woman out of love (platonic). One of his ex-lovers could stand up at this point of the ceremony and state that the man was gay and that he feels that the relationship wouldn't work ebcause it wouldn't involve consumating it.

Hardly legal, but a valid point
 
But what would apply to this scenario laid before us? The guy wasn't gay... so we would have to assume consumation. He also wasn't presented as a sibling or a first cousin... so no incest. Others would be age, duress, and bigamy. Those are the big moral church and state buffers to objecting to a wedding. Just because the guy is going to die in a year and a half is no cause for objection... after all... he might even die sooner from an accident... or he might pull through after all.
 
Squiggy said:
Easy one.....

1. He should never have treated the patient because of the pending relationship.

2. Having treated the patient, the Doctor/Patient confidentiality supercedes ALL else.
Click to expand...
tonks said:
i wouldn't tell...but you can bet your paycheck i wouldn't refrain from telling him what a schmuck i think he was and how much respect i had lost for him by his callous handling of his futures wife's feelings. what a bastard.
Click to expand...
 
Regardless patient / doctor confidentiality...CAN"T-SHOULD NOT....BUT, If it was me- I would seriously tell my sister/brother in law to reconsider telling their future to be spouse. If they REALLY love each other it should not matter wether or not how long that person has to live. And if their answer was still not to tell-I would ask them to be seen by a different doctor-to close to family to have to have that kind of pressure on them. (the doctor)
 
Squiggy said:
Easy one.....

1. He should never have treated the patient because of the pending relationship.

2. Having treated the patient, the Doctor/Patient confidentiality supercedes ALL else.
Click to expand...
We are agreeing too often these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top