The ethics of anonymised HIV testing of pregnant women: a reappraisal

Journal of Medical Ethics 26 (1):16-21 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Seroprevalence monitoring of HIV in pregnant women by anonymised unlinked testing has been widely adopted in the UK and other countries. The scientific rationale is to eliminate participation and selection bias. The ethical justification is that the public good outweighs any harm to individuals. The assumption has been that individuals have had their autonomy respected by the offer of informed consent. In the light of new scientific evidence, it is doubtful that the public good is best served by the continuation of anonymously testing women receiving antenatal care. It is submitted that it is no longer ethical for health professionals to refrain from informing pregnant women of the benefits of voluntary named testing, or to request their consent to anonymised testing. The legal and moral concept of duty of care is examined, and the abrogation of this duty through anonymisation is explained

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Mandatory hiv testing in pregnancy: Is there ever a time?Russell Armstrong - 2007 - Developing World Bioethics 8 (1):1–10.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
8 (#1,138,312)

6 months
2 (#668,348)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Evidence-Based Medicine and Quality of Care.Donna Dickenson & Paolo Vineis - 2002 - Health Care Analysis 10 (3):243-259.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Stories of Sickness.M. Boulton - 1989 - Journal of Medical Ethics 15 (1):48-48.

Add more references