Must physicians reveal their wounds?

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 204-213

  Furrow, Barry R ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CONFIDENTIALITY; DISEASE TRANSMISSION; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; MALPRACTICE; PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; UNITED STATES;

PROFESSIONAL PATIENT RELATIONSHIP;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CONFIDENTIALITY; DISCLOSURE; DISEASE TRANSMISSION, PROFESSIONAL-TO-PATIENT; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; PHYSICIAN IMPAIRMENT; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TRUTH DISCLOSURE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030101642     PISSN: 09631801     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0963180100006940     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Salgo v. Stanford University Board of Trustees. 317 P.2d 170 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957).
2. See Smith v. Weaver. 407 N.W. 2d 174 (Neb. 1987). State statutes enacted during bursts of tort reform activity in the states often imposed the professional disclosure standard upon the courts, over their objection in some cases. See for example, Eccleston v. Chait. 492 N.W. 2d 860 (Neb. 1992).
3. Woolley v. Henderson. 418 A.2d 1123 (Me. 1980).
4. Furrow BR, Greaney TL, Johnson SH, Jost T, Schwartz RL. Health Law, Vol I. New York: West Publishing Co., 1995:412.
5. Canterbury v. Spence. 464 F.2d 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972).
6. See, for example, Fain v. Smith. 479 So. 2d 1150 (Ala. 1985).
7. See, for example, Ala. Code §6-5-484. 1990.
8. Korman v. Mallin. 858 P.2d 1145 (Alaska 1993) (adopting what the court finds to be the "modern trend").
9. Wheeldon v. Madison. 374 N.W.2d 367, 375 (S.D. 1985).
10. See, for example. Bourgeois v. McDonald. 622 So. 2d 684 (La. Ct. App. 1993).
11. Steele v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. 371 So. 2d 843 (La. Ct. App. 1979).
12. Harbeson v. Parke-Davis. 746 F.2d 517 (9th Cir. 1984).
13. Shinn v. St. James Mercy Hosp. 675 F. Supp. 94 (W.D.N.Y. 1987).
14. See generally Kissinger v. Lofgren. 836 F.2d 678, 681 (1st Cir. 1988) (risks of infection from operations should be known to every patient).
15. Cunningham v. Charles Pfizer & Co. 532 P.2d 1377, 1381 (Okla. 1974) (duty to disclose "even though the chances of the adverse reaction occurring are statistically small").
16. Canterbury v. Spence. 464 F.2d 772, 789 n. 85 (D.C. Cir. 1972).
17. Fischer v. Wilmington Gen. Hosp. 149 A.2d 749 (Del. 1959) (no need to disclose small risk of hepatitis infection from blood transfusion).
18. Cobbs v. Grant. 502 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1972) (disclosure of risk of death is necessary); Cooper v. Roberts. 286 A.2d 647 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1971) (1 in 2,500 risk of stomach puncture during gastroscopic examination is material).