HIV-INFECTED HEALTH-CARE PROFESSIONALS - PUBLIC THREAT OR PUBLIC SACRIFICE

被引:14
作者
DANIELS, N
机构
[1] Department of Philosophy, Tufts University, Medford, 02155., MA
关键词
D O I
10.2307/3350084
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
The ethical controversy surrounding the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and American Medical Association (AMA) guidelines for restricting the practice of HIV-infected health professionals appears to hinge on whether we give priority to the rights of infected workers or patients. We cannot simply dismiss the concerns of patients as irrational, despite the low risks of transmission. Nor can we avoid the dispute about rights by claiming with the AMA that professionals have obligations to refrain from imposing "identifiable risk," however low, on patients. Nevertheless, allowing the full exercise of patient rights, either by giving patients the opportunity to know the risks they face and to switch providers, or by removing infected providers (compulsory switching), would make each of us worse off. This gives us adequate reason to reject these guidelines and to emphasize other infection control measures.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 42
页数:40
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]  
Altman Lawrence K, 1991, N Y Times Web, pC3
[2]  
ALTMAN LK, 1991, NY TIMES 0723, pC2
[3]  
ALTMAN LK, 1991, NY TIMES 0830, P19
[4]  
ALTMAN LK, 1991, NY TIMES 1204, pC19
[5]  
ALTMAN LK, 1991, NY TIMES 1011, pA12
[6]  
*AM MED ASS COUNC, 1991, STAT HIV INF PHYS
[7]  
APPLEBOME P, 1987, NY TIMES 1001, pB8
[8]  
Barnes M, 1990, Law Med Health Care, V18, P311
[9]   THE DOUBLE EDGE OF KNOWLEDGE [J].
BERWICK, DM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1991, 266 (06) :841-842
[10]   DUTY TO TREAT OR RIGHT TO REFUSE [J].
DANIELS, N .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1991, 21 (02) :36-46