|
Craig M Klugman, PhD, Dept. of Health Ecology/Nevada Center for Ethics and Health Policy, University of Nevada Reno, MS 274, Reno, NV 89557-0036, 775-784-4041x229, cmk@unr.edu
Confidentiality and informed consent are considered ethical pillars of the health enterprise in the United States. Under confidentiality one tries to maintain as private the health information of an individual. Under informed consent a person must have knowledge of an intervention, be aware of treatments and alternatives, know risks and benefits, and be legally able to grant consent. However, in the case of a bioterrorism event, these two pillars may have to be altered or suspended. For example, public safety may depend on broadcasting the identity of someone infected with a bioterrorism vector. Knowledge of infected people may be necessary to ensure that they receive treatment, are quarantined, and are removed as a threat to the public. Such interventions as vaccines or drug therapy may need to be forced on individuals even if they object to prevent the spread of an infectious agent. Treatments may need to be kept secret so that bioterrorists cannot find ways to alter bioweapons to circumvent therapies. Under the principle of solidarity, the health of the commons overrides that of the individual and may require curtailing individual rights that pose a threat to the health of others. This paper examines the ethics of limiting confidentiality and informed consent in bioterrorism events to protect the public’s health.
Learning Objectives: At the conclusion of this paper, the leaner will be able to
Keywords: Bioterrorism, Bioethics
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.