A man tells his doctor he has HIV... should the doc tell the man's wife?

Question

assuming the wife is a patient of the same doctor, the wife wants to stop using condoms so they can have a kid.
would the doc be in breach of a doctor-patient duty to the man, or in breach of duty of care to the wife?
ideas?!

Answer 1

where i live i dont know about other state it is against the law to not tell the partner that you have sex with that you have HIV you can go to jail for that.

Answer 2

It's messy, but I think the only decent solution is messier.

- The doctor cannot breach the patient's confidentiality by telling the wife.

- The doctor must stress urgently to the husband the importance of telling the wife. Also, in most states (unless it's a federal law) it's illegal to knowingly expose someone to HIV. The doctor should relate that little factoid to the husband.

- If the doctor suspects the husband won't tell the wife (either the husband said as much or when the wife is in, a few strategically placed questions reveal that she doesn't know, e.g.: "have you ever been exposed to HIV") the doctor should probably talk to his hospital's ethics panel.

- I would say that the next step would be to talk to the husband again and reiterate that it is against the law to knowingly expose someone to HIV. Therefore either the husband needs to tell the wife or, if he won't, he should be advised that if the husband and wife are having sexual relations that the hospital will be obligated to tell the police - otherwise they would be abetting a crime and placing someone's life in danger.

At that point, if it is clear that the husband is not telling the wife, and that the wife is sexually active with her husband, the hospital will have no choice but to notify the police.

That's the only way I can see this playing out legally and ethically.

Answer 3

if the doc tells the wife,he is in direct breach of the confidentiality law, i believe. all the doc can do legitimately, I think is
to warn the patient that if he does not tell his wife and subsequently passes on the infection, he may be found guilty of causing actual bodily harm to his wife. If the wife goes on to develop AIDS and dies,he may be found guilty of causing death by negligence.
the doctor would be a key witness in any Court proceedings. the onus is therefore on the husband to tell his wife. One might assume that the husband has been brave enough to tell the
doctor so he should be brave enough to tell his wife.The practical reality tho i feel is that the doc should immediately request permission from the husband to inform the wife. If he refuses
then I would assume the doc would have to seek permission from a Medical Board to pass on the information.
Aside from the laws regarding patient confidentiality, the doctor should, of course, inform the wife immediately. If u are the unfortunate victim u have my sympathy and would suggest a joint meeting between the three parties to be the way forward.

Answer 4

The doctor must not tell the mans wife, he has sworn a hypocratic oath to protect individual patients confidentiality, however morally wrong keeping quiet might be, he could be struck off the medical register for breaking this oath, however, if the man knowing he has HIV has unprotected sex with his wife without telling her and the infects her there is a very strong case to prosecute the man for commiting GBH on his wife !

Answer 5

Usually, the doctor tell the patient that he has HIV, not the other way around. But anyway, doctor MUST NOT tell the guy's wife anything. Doctor-patient confidentiality principle is sacred! Instead, the doctor should urge the guy to tell his wife and, as a minimum, to practice safe sex with her.

Answer 6

The Doctor is in an Impossible situation - Patient Confidentiality forbids him Divulging this information -- so he has to witness the very Serious likelihood of witnessing other Patients being Infected with a deadly disease --- this aspect of the Law is CRAZY

Answer 7

By intentionally infecting his wife with HIV, the man is commiting a crime. Dr can be considered complicit in this if he knows and does nothing so it is in these instances that dr/patient confidentiality had to be disregarded as the law of the land takes precendence over non-legal confidentiality agreements.

Answer 8

I think the doctor would be breaking confidentiality if he told the mans wife, but since a Doctors(or anyone's) duty is to preserve life then she should be told if the man refuses to tell her himself.

Answer 9

The doctor would be breaching every rule in the book.It is up to the man to tell his wife

Answer 10

Did you not watch Neighbours??? Susan remarried and it turned out that the new husband had some form of leukaemia and he was going to die because it was in final stages. Karl (Susan's ex-husband) was his (nu husbands) doctor. he had to make the decision of whether to tell or not.

I think the doctor would be bound my doctor-patient confidentiality, surely its against the Hippocratic oath to inform the wife.

It perhaps worth contacting a medical board who would be able to inform you of which the doctor should do. they would be able to inform of consequences if the doctor decided either way i should think.

Answer 11

If he doesn't the wife will contract the disease.
The husband is breaking the law if he doesn't tell her because hes basically killing her. (see the recent case in the press)
I think (and hope) the doctors first responsibility is to protect the patient