The Hippocratic Oath is a sacred oath taken by all healthcare professionals, one which underscores their responsibility for the privacy of their patients. However, there are circumstances where this privacy must be breached. Even the modernized version of the Hippocratic Oath makes little mention of such circumstances (Tyson, 2001, p. 6). Moreover, such privacy violations can be justified with sound reasoning derived from philosophic theories.
In cases of patients who are diagnosed with HIV, the healthcare professional also has a responsibility for public health. According to Thiroux & Krasemann (2015), physicians are charged with the responsibility to inform the spouses and/or sexual partners of those with HIV. Moreover, “As a general rule, confidentiality should be maintained, but at the same time everything must be done to protect the innocent from any kind of contagion” (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2015, p. 306). Thus, one can see how utilitarianism influences this line of reasoning. In the case of patients diagnosed with HIV/AIDS, it is incumbent upon the healthcare worker to maximize the possible good, thereby benefiting as many beings as possible, which is a major tenet of philosopher John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism.
In instances where a patient presents a clear danger to the well-being of others, it is the responsibility of the healthcare professional to ensure the overall public health. For example, if a patient makes a psychiatrist aware of his intent to murder someone, the psychiatrist has an ethical duty to violate his oath of secrecy, and alert legal authorities about the patient’s murderous intent. Again, philosophy has something to add to the decision-making process. Kant’s duty ethics may help the psychiatrist make the right decision insofar as duty ethics implies that one must act out of “a respect for moral law” (Garrett, 2006, internet). By employing Kant’s so-called Categorical Imperative, a psychiatrist faced with such a dilemma would be able to quickly determine that the action of ensuring public safety overshadows the sanctity of his Hippocratic Oath.
Finally, the Hippocratic Oath is sacred for both patients and healthcare professionals. However, there are several instances that warrant closer scrutiny of the oath, and require ethical acumen on the part of all healthcare professionals. Finding a balance between honoring patient privacy and public health is challenging, but ethics sheds a great deal of light on any problems that may tip the balance away from a blind duty to upholding the oath.
References
Garrett, J. (02 Oct. 2006). Kant’s Duty Ethics. Retrieved from
http://people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/ethics/kant.htm.
Thiroux, J.P., & Krasemann, K.W. (2015). Ethics: Theory and Practice. Boston: Pearson.
Tyson, P. (27 Mar. 2001). The Hippocratic Oath Today. NOVA. Retrieved from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocraticoathtoday.html.
