When we discuss about the honesty in medicine, there will be multitudinous facts regarding this topic. First things first. Honesty in medicine is a fundamental pillar as well as cornerstone of our profession as a doctor who works in medical field. Honesty plays a crucial role in the field of medicine. In medicine, we are often the one who deliver the brutal honesty to our patients. In order to relieve the fears and anxieties of the patients, should physicians choose not to tell the naked truth to them? This may seem uncomplicated but it is actually a ticklish question. Nearly one third of physicians do not agree that medical erroneousness or other predicaments should be disclosed to patients. Not telling the truth may has numerous purposes, take various forms and lead to many different consequences.
As healthcare contributors, we are expected to be honest and open with our patients even when that is arduous to do so. Important as it is for patients and doctors, honesty has been either a major concern in medical ethics or an important value for doctors. Keep in mind that patients...
Cullen and Klein understand that deception is wrong and disrespectful to the patient but criticize that some cases are more complicated and not so black and white. They argue that physicians should be able to withhold information that can significantly benefit the patient. The key part is that the benefit is greater than what the deception causes.
One of the most complex, ever-changing careers is the medical field. Physicians are not only faced with medical challenges, but also with ethical ones. In “Respect for Patients, Physicians, and the Truth”, by Susan Cullen and Margaret Klein, they discuss to great extent the complicated dilemmas physicians encounter during their practice. In their publication, Cullen and Klein discuss the pros and cons of disclosing the medical diagnosis (identifying the nature or cause of the disease), and the prognosis (the end result after treating the condition). But this subject is not easily regulated nor are there guidelines to follow. One example that clearly illustrates the ambiguity of the subject is when a patient is diagnosed with a serious, life-threatening
Based on them, we can definitely eliminate options (c) and (d). Option (c) is against the principle of veracity and informed consent because the doctor was lying and hiding the information about the patient’s health that the patient was supposed to know. Option (d) is morally incorrect because the patient is lied to and the surgeon is not penalized. Option (b) does abide by the principle of veracity, but is against rationality because it sets negative example for the community that the doctors can be forgiven for their mistakes. Moreover, it does not abide by stewardship because the surgeon is taking advantage of being a doctor to conceal the truth. Consequently, the morally correct decision would be the option (a) because it abides by the principles of veracity and informed consent as the responsibility of disclosing the truth to the patient is fulfilled. Moreover, considering the rationality and stewardship, it will set an example for all the doctors that incomplete disclosure of information to the patient is unacceptable and the doctors should not take advantage of their importance in the
In “Should Doctors Tell the Truth?” Joseph Collins argues for paternalistic deception, declaring that it is permissible for physicians to deceive their patients when it is in their best interests. Collins considers his argument from a “pragmatic” standpoint, rather than a moral one, and uses his experience with the sick to justify paternalistic deception. Collins argues that in his years of practicing, he has encountered four types of patients who want to know the truth: those that want to know so they know how much time they have left, those who do not want to know and may suffer if told the truth, those who are incapable of hearing the truth, and those who do not have a serious diagnosis (605). Collins follows with the assertion that the more serious the condition is, the less likely the patient is to seek information about their health (606).
Truth in medicine is a big discussion among many medical professionals about how doctors handle the truth. Truth to a patient can be presented in many ways and different doctors have different ways of handling it. Many often believe that patient’s being fully aware of their health; such as a bad diagnosis, could lead to depression compared to not knowing the diagnosis. In today’s society doctor’s are expected to deliver patient’s the whole truth in order for patients to actively make their own health decisions. Shelly K. Schwartz discusses the truth in her essay, Is It Ever Ok to Lie to Patients?. Schwartz argument is that patients should be told the truth about their health and presented and addressed in a way most comfortable to the patient.
Rhodes, R. and Strain, J.J. (2004) Whistleblowing in academic Medicine. Journal of Medical Ethics. 30 (1)
Should doctors tell the truth to their patients? How much information should the patient know about a certain ill or operation? These controversial questions are asked more frequently in our society. Patients nowadays,. are very sensitive to certain diseases more than before. This paper argues against telling the truth in doctor-patient relationship. Not by defending the idea directly but, by presenting first how truth can be harmful to the patient and by giving Higgs’ objection to it, then by giving my own objection to Higgs’ argument.
One day while doing his job, a physician used a used swab that was possibly infected with HIV on another patient. When looked at by certain people, the doctor did the correct thing by telling his patient that he roused a swab on him/her. However, the chances of this patient getting HIV was substantially low, and he should have waited for the patient to develop symptoms, which would have been rare, before telling the truth. As stated by Michael Greenberg, “he might have done better by keeping his mouth shut.” If the doctor did lie, he could have lied to protect himself, the quality of life of the patient, and his ability to help others with their lives. If he had not told the patient that he used the swab on him/her, he/she would not have had to live in fear of getting HIV. Because of this decision of truth telling, the doctor lost his job, money, confidence, and also affected someone’s quality of life.
I have been working in healthcare for over 10 years, and have had my share of ethical decisions to make. In the healthcare world, specifically in the United States, there has been a major shift in policy towards patient privacy, and there are strict guidelines in healthcare about what information is accessible, when it is allowably accessible, and who
Does the doctor must tell the truth directly to the patient regardless of the families' wishes? Or maybe the doctor should tell the truth first to the patient and just after that to the family? Ruiping Fan and Benfu Li’s article tries to arguing if the doctor should or should not tell the truth to the patient. In my opinion, patients have the right to know their state of health. To tell the truth despite families wishes, and to tell the truth to patient before telling to family depends on many things, such as the patient's age , disease , religious beliefs, and etc.
Healthcare professions have codes of conduct and ethics that address the issue of honesty and trust in relation to patient encounters yet truth-telling (or being honest) versus deception (or being dishonest) has been identified as an ethical issue in hospitals, particularly about diagnosis and prognosis disclosures. Dossa (2010) defines being honest or telling the truth as relating the facts as one knows them. Furthermore, Dossa (2010) states that deception can be an act of dishonesty but also can be without lies. In other words, forms of deception include not giving any information, not giving information of the truth, withholding information, selecting what information to give and not give, and giving vague information.
The writer discusses a situation of the doctor failing to disclose the nature of important medical condition which can jeopardize several of the patient’s family members and puts the doctor at odds with them. The problem is also discussed by Sutrop (2011) who show how protecting the patient’s confidentiality and self- decision capacity has actually caused severe hindrances to the field of scientific development and research.
Patient confidentiality is one of the foundations to the medical practice. Patients arrive at hospitals seeking treatment believing that all personal information will remain between themselves and the medical staff. In order to assure patients privacy, confidentiality policies were established. However, a confidentiality policy may be broken only in the case the medical staff believes that the patient is a danger to themselves or to others in society. Thesis Statement: The ethics underlying patient confidentiality is periodically questioned in our society due to circumstances that abruptly occur leaving health professionals to decide between right and wrong.
Honesty and integrity are very important in the medical field. We as healthcare workers are given such trust and responsibility. We should always strive to do our best and when faced with tough situations. When we don't always know what to do or the proper way to react we should always be honest. Let our superiors know what is going on and ask for advice when we need to. This would show that we are honest. When we come into contact with patients they rely on us to do the right thing and always perform our job with integrity. Often people’s lives are in our hands. We have to care about the patient and care about our job in order to continue to provide quality care. If someone hates their job they are not going to give their best in every way they can. The medical field is not a place for that person.
Consequently, it can be assumed that doctors might tend to avoid such a confession in order to maintain their image of being a “good doctor” (J.Shahidi). Not being a good doctor may eventually lead to doctor’s loss of business and as a result physicians may tend to hide the truth even if it opposes patient autonomy