A defense of unqualified medical confidentiality

American Journal of Bioethics 6 (2):7 – 18 (2006)
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.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/15265160500506308
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 34,373
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Principles of Biomedical Ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1979 - Oxford University Press.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Saying Privacy, Meaning Confidentiality.Abraham P. Schwab, Lily Frank & Nada Gligorov - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (11):44-45.

View all 21 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total downloads
163 ( #34,884 of 2,266,853 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #37,922 of 2,266,853 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature