Abstract
In the practice of medicine there has long been a conflict between patient management and respect for patient autonomy. In recent years this conflict has taken on a new form as patient management has increasingly been shifted from physicians to insurers, employers, and health care bureaucracies. The consequence has been a diminshment of both physician and patient autonomy and a parallel diminishment of medical record confidentiality. Although the new managers pay lip service to the rights of patients to confidentiality of their records, in fact they advocate very liberal medical records access policies. They argue that a wide range of parties has a need to know the contents of individually identifiable medical records in order to control costs, promote quality of care, and undertake research in the public interest. Broad interpretations of the need to know, however, are at odds with strict interpretations of the right to confidentiality. Strict confidentiality policies require that, with few exceptions, patient consent be obtained whenever a patient's record is used outside the treatment context. The traditional criterion for overriding the consent requirement has been that without the override some harm would directly result. This rule is now challenged by the claim that patients have a duty to make their records available for a wide range of research and public health purposes. The longstanding tension between physician responsibility for patient welfare and respect for patient autonomy is being replaced by a debatable requirement that both physician and patient autonomy be subordinated to the goals of data collection and analysis.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Medical Association (2000) Comments on the proposed Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information, 45 CFR Parts 160 through 164, 64 Fed. Reg. 59917 (November 3, 1999).
Angell, M. (2000) A Farewell. New England Journal of Medicine 342(26), 1989.
Health Care Financing Administration (2000) Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS-B1).
Horkheimer, M. (1967) Zur Kritik der instrumentellan Vernuft. Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer Verlag; (1974) Critique of Instrumental Reason. New York: The Seabury Press.
Katz, J. (1984) The Silent World of Doctor and Patient. New York: The Free Press.
Knoppers, B.M. (2000) Confidentiality of Health Information: International Comparative Approaches. In Protecting Privacy in Health Services Research (pp. 141-152). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Margolit, A. (1996) The Decent Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Massachusetts Health Data Consortium (1998) Compendium of Confidentiality and Privacy Principles. Available at http://www.mahealthdata.org/mhdc/mhdc2.nsf/documents/privacyprinciples.
Mishra, R. (2000) Confidential medical records are not always private. Boston Globe, August 1, 2000, D1.
Regan, P.M. (1995) Legislating Privacy: Technology, Social Values, and Public Policy. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
Roscam Abbing, H.R. (2000) Medical Confidentiality and Electronic Patient Files. Med Law 19, 107-112.
Rosen, G. (1974) From Medical Police to Social Medicine: Essays on the History of Health Care. New York: Science History Publications.
Rosen, J. (2000) The Unwanted Gaze: The Destruction of Privacy in America. New York: Random House.
Rosenberg, C.E. (1987) The Care of Strangers: The Rise of America's Hospital System. New York: Basic Books.
Supreme Court of the United States (1996) Jaffee v. Redmond. No. 95-266.
Timmermans, S. (2000) Technology and Medical Practice. In C.E. Bird, P. Conrad, and A.M. Fremont (Eds.), Handbook of Medical Sociology (pp. 309-321). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Tribe, L.H. (1991) The Constitution in Cyberspace: Keynote Address at the First Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy. Available at www.epsr.org/conferences/cfp91/tribe2.html.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Woodward, B. Confidentiality, Consent and Autonomy in the Physician-Patient Relationship. Health Care Analysis 9, 337–351 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012910016814
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012910016814