Some ethicists argue that patient confidentiality is absolute and thus should never be broken. I examine these arguments that when critically scrutinised, become porous. I will explore the concept of patient confidentiality and argue that although, this is a very important medical and bioethical issue, this needs to be wisely delivered to reduce third party harm or even detriment to the patient. The argument for absolute confidentiality is particularly weak when it comes to genetic information and inherited disease.

It is broadly held that confidentiality may be breached when doing so can avert grave harm to a third party. This essay challenges the conventional wisdom. Neither legal duties, personal morality nor personal values are sufficient to ground professional obligations. A methodology is developed drawing on core professional values, the nature of professions, and the justification for distinct professional obligations. Though doctors have a professional obligation to prevent public peril, they do not honor it by breaching confidentiality. It is shown (...) how the protective purpose to be furthered by reporting is defeated by the practice of reporting. Hence there is no conflict between confidentiality and the professional responsibility to protect endangered third parties. *A longer version of this article will appear as “Medical Confidentiality” in The Blackwell Guide to Bioethics, ed. R. Rhodes et al. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2006. (shrink)

Laws in China relating to HIV disclosure are inconsistent. After a patient has tested HIV‐positive, service providers struggle to decide who should be informed first: patients, family members, or both. To understand service providers' attitudes and practices regarding the HIV notification process in China, 1101 service providers from a southwestern province of China were surveyed. Opinions were gathered from providers at five different levels of health care facilities (provincial, city, county, township and village). A mixed methods approach was used to (...) analyze perceptions of informing family members of a patient's HIV status. Quantitative analysis was used to examine whether providers held a favorable attitude toward notifying family members first and qualitative analysis was used to explore the reasons and consequences of notifying family members first. Nearly half of service providers felt family members should be informed of a patient's HIV status first. Providers who were older, had contact with HIV patients, or had less medical education were more likely to agree with a family‐first notification practice. Psychological pressure, concern about protecting family members, the need for family support, and consideration for local regulations were cited as the main reasons for this practice. There is an immediate need to re‐examine HIV notification policies so that there are consistent guidelines and procedures for providers throughout China. (shrink)