If the practice is for the most part non-invasive i.e., anesthesiology or radiology?
2007-05-19 04:00:44 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health ➔ Other - Health
Not if he or she informs patients and then uses all mandatory universal safety precautions.
2007-05-19 04:05:06 · answer #1 · answered by marshfield_meme 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Getting HIV is a problem that happens to some physicians in the very act of doing their jobs treating patients that have it. Its not unethical for a doctor to treat patients if he or she has HIV - it would be unethical for them to give a blood transfusion from their own blood, or to allow a transplant from their own organs, but that's entirely different. The answer is no.
2007-05-19 11:05:01 · answer #2 · answered by Paul Hxyz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As long as there's no point in which they'd have the slightest possibility of exchanging blood with a patient, I dont see a problem with it.
Should teachers quit their job if they're found to be HIV-positive? Couldnt that apply to ANY job? HIV-positive people would then have NO place to work. That's discrimination.
2007-05-19 11:06:00 · answer #3 · answered by Sarah 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't trust a physician with HIV. That's like going to a dentist with no teeth, or a mechanic who doesn't own a car.
But is it unethical? I wouldn't say so. If people are still willing to go to a doctor with HIV, then that's fine as long as it doesn't get spread, which is unlikely. I'm just saying that I wouldn't.
2007-05-19 11:07:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
well simply it's not unethical face d reality u will not get it untill there is unprotected sex or blood transfusion from positive patients body to another just be honest to ur patients & explain them nopthing happens
& seriously getting HIV+ doesn't mean there is something wrong in touching there is nothing unethical trust me
2007-05-19 11:11:19 · answer #5 · answered by just answering 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think so. A doctor should always be ready to make any medical interference in any case and should be whether the domain. If a doc is radiologist this doesn't mean he/she will never make injections or any interferences related with blood, even the most basic ones. This is always a risk, a doctor should save lives, not infect the patients.
2007-05-19 11:11:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It shouldn't be. But try to keep only half of your patients if so. I don't think I would go there, just because I know, but then again, if I would find out later I would try to sue him/her. It shouldn't be unethical, but tell that to your conscience...
2007-05-19 11:30:53 · answer #7 · answered by kobe 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ethics are a man made "construct". You live your life and then die. If this doctor chooses to practice and someone gets AIDS, then he may have to pay a price... but ethical, that is in the eye of the beholder I guess.
2007-05-19 11:08:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
nope, a person with hiv who is practicing medicine is actually putting themselves at more risk than the patients.
2007-05-19 11:27:25 · answer #9 · answered by pandora078 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
well my take on that is this/i feel they should inform patients that they r hiv positve /and let the person decide if they want them taking care of them/but that goes for all practices/i often wonder myself/ just how many professionalls that r out there that r carries of disease/and continue to treat us/they ask us ???? but our health status/but how many ask their professionals if they r carriers/i know this is not the answer to the ???/ but i had to let myslf vent on this one
2007-05-19 11:08:59 · answer #10 · answered by hotdogsarefree 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋