You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Medical Confidentiality: An Intransigent and Absolute Obligation
Michael H. Kottow
Journal of Medical Ethics
Vol. 12, No. 3 (Sep., 1986), pp. 117-122
Published by: BMJ
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27716495
Page Count: 6
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Patient confidentiality, Physicians, Confidants, Medical ethics, Medical practice, Privileged communications, Morality, Patient care, Ethics, Fairness
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Clinicians' work depends on sincere and complete disclosures from their patients; they honour this candidness by confidentially safeguarding the information received. Breaching confidentiality causes harms that are not commensurable with the possible benefits gained. Limitations or exceptions put on confidentiality would destroy it, for the confider would become suspicious and un-co-operative, the confidant would become untrustworthy and the whole climate of the clinical encounter would suffer irreversible erosion. Excusing breaches of confidence on grounds of superior moral values introduces arbitrariness and ethical unreliability into the medical context. Physicians who breach the agreement of confidentiality are being unfair, thus opening the way for, and becoming vulnerable to, the morally obtuse conduct of others. Confidentiality should not be seen as the cosy but dispensable atmosphere of clinical settings; rather, it constitutes a guarantee of fairness in medical actions. Possible perils that might accrue to society are no greater than those accepted when granting inviolable custody of information to priests, lawyers and bankers. To jeopardise the integrity of confidential medical relationships is too high a price to pay for the hypothetical benefits this might bring to the prevailing social order.
Journal of Medical Ethics © 1986 BMJ