Kipnis Kenneth
University of Hawaii, Manoa, USA.
Am J Bioeth. 2006 Mar-Apr;6(2):7-18. doi: 10.1080/15265160500506308.
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.
人们普遍认为,当这样做可以避免对第三方造成严重伤害时,可以违反保密规定。本文对这一传统观念提出了挑战。法律义务、个人道德或个人价值观都不足以成为职业义务的依据。本文借鉴核心职业价值观、职业的性质以及不同职业义务的正当理由,开发了一种方法。尽管医生有防止公众危险的职业义务,但他们不能通过违反保密规定来履行这一义务。文章表明,报告行为会破坏报告旨在实现的保护目的。因此,保密与保护濒危第三方的职业责任之间不存在冲突。