In this paper we consider the use of cases in medical ethics research and teaching. To date, there has been little discussion about the consent or confidentiality requirements that ought to govern the use of cases in these areas. This is in marked contrast to the requirements for consent to publish cases in clinical journals, or to use personal information in research. There are a number of reasons why it might be difficult to obtain consent to use cases in ethics. (...) Many cases concern people who are incompetent, and thus unable to give consent. Often the material is of a sensitive nature, it is not clear who should give consent, or the ethicist has no access to those involved. We argue that the use of cases in ethics research and teaching can be justified by appeal to the public interest argument, and suggest a number of areas for discussion and clarification. (shrink)

In 1997, a court in Cyprus jailed Pavlos Georgiou for fifteen months for knowingly infecting a British woman, Janet Pink, with HIV-1 through unprotected sexual intercourse. Pink met Georgiou in January 1994 whilst on holiday. She discovered that she had contracted the virus from him in October 1994 but continued the relationship until July 1996 when she developed AIDS. She returned to the UK for treatment and reported Georgiou to the Cypriot authorities.1There have been a number of legal cases involving (...) deliberate transmission of HIV, but most have involved forced exposure to infected bodily fluids for example, rape or biting, and have been dealt with using the existing legislation for rape or assault. While it is often difficult to prove responsibility for transmission in cases of forced exposure to HIV, it is even more contentious in cases like those of Janet Pink where an individual has consented to sex but claims that he/she was not forewarned of his/herpartner's HIV-positive status. At present there is no specific criminal offence of having unprotected sexual intercourse without disclosing one's HIV-positive status but a prosecution could possibly be brought under any one of a number of existing offences.2 Perhaps a change of policy needs to be considered. The Home Office has issued a consultation document which outlines a proposal that will allow the criminalisation of intentional transmission of diseases, like HIV, that are likely to cause serious harm. This revised legislation would cover all other potentially fatal diseases but seems primarily to be targeted at HIV transmission. Should transmission of HIV through consensual sex, without the HIV-positive status of the individual being disclosed, be an offence? This question, and that of whether there is a moral obligation to disclose a positive HIV status prior to having a sexual relationship is the subject of this paper. (shrink)

Die ärztliche Schweigepflicht ist für die Vertrauensbeziehung zwischen Arzt und Patient von grundlegender Bedeutung. Von besonderer Brisanz sind Fälle, bei denen das Schweigegebot eine Gefährdung Dritter bewirkt. Ein aktuelles Urteil des Oberlandesgerichtes Frankfurt hat eine erhebliche medizinrechtliche und ethische Debatte ausgelöst: Eine Frau als Klägerin verlangte vom Hausarzt der Familie die Feststellung der Schadensersatzpflicht und ein hohes Schmerzensgeld aufgrund einer Pflichtverletzung, da der Arzt von der Aids-Erkrankung ihres uneinsichtigen Lebensgefährten wusste, die Patientin aber mit Verweis auf seine Schweigepflicht nicht über (...) die Gefahr informiert hatte. Problematisch ist die von den Richtern neben dem Offenbarungsrecht vertretene Rechtspflicht des Arztes zur Mitteilung des Sachverhaltes. Der Beitrag erörtert die ethischen und rechtlichen Implikationen dieses Urteils sowie die grundlegenden Regelungen des neuen Schuld- und Schadenersatzrechts in Bezug auf die ärztliche Schweigepflicht. Aus medizinethischer Perspektive ist bei der Güterabwägung für die höher rangigen Werte zu entscheiden (Prinzipien des Nichtschadens und der Benefizienz, "Tarasoff-Pflicht" zur Warnung), gleichwohl zeigen der genannte und andere Fälle Defizite in der Patient-Arzt-Beziehung in Bezug auf einen reflektierten Dialog und die Notwendigkeit von klaren Empfehlungen für den Alltag. Ein interdisziplinärer Ansatz kann medizinrechtliche und ethische Aspekte sinnvoll integrieren. (shrink)