HIV-infected professionals, patient rights, and the 'switching dilemma'.
expert_opinion · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 1311045.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The ethical issues surrounding the Centers for Disease Control and American Medical Association guidelines for health professionals infected with the human immunodeficiency virus are examined and discussed. Although human immunodeficiency virus transmission risks during surgery are lower than many risks we routinely face, it is not irrational for a patient to want to switch from an infected professional to an uninfected one. The American Medical Association claim that physicians have a duty to avoid imposing any identifiable risks is implausible. Knowing the Centers for Disease Control estimate of risks gives us no way to decide whether the rights of patients or those of handicapped (infected) workers should be given priority. Granting priority to patient rights, either by giving patients the opportunity to know the risks they face and to switch to another provider, or by removing infected providers (compulsory switching), makes us all worse off. This gives us reason to reject these guidelines and emphasize other infection control measures.
Medical subject headings
- HIV Infections
- Patient Advocacy
- Physicians