Abstract

AbstractGenetic information is relevant not only to the patient, but also to their family. Where a patient refuses to share that information with family members, then their legal rights may conflict. This paper focuses on that conflict between the rights of individuals and the rights of third parties. We first examine the nature of the duty of confidence as it applies in these circumstances, and the extent to which it can appropriately accommodate the familial nature of genetic information. We then consider the situations in which a healthcare practitioner might owe a third-party family member a tortious duty of care. We conclude that in most cases, there will be no duty owed to third parties, but that in certain limited circumstances, a duty of care should arise.

Highlights

  • Medical confidentiality in the context of genetics raises interesting tensions because the information in question is relevant to an individual patient, and to family members

  • In ABC v St George’s,2 the claimant argued that a healthcare practitioner (HCP) who had failed to disclose genetic information to a family member was liable to that family member in negligence

  • We first examine the nature of the duty of confidence as it applies in these circumstances, and the extent to which it can appropriately accommodate the familial nature of genetic information

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Medical confidentiality in the context of genetics raises interesting tensions because the information in question is relevant to an individual patient, and to family members. An autosomal dominant disorder is a genetic disease which will manifest itself if an individual possesses at least one affected copy of the relevant gene, with a 50% risk that offspring will inherit the mutation from the affected parent. A patient refuses permission to disclose, as in the case of ABC, a conflict between the duty of confidentiality, and any potential duty to third parties may arise Such cases may be relatively rare in practice, perhaps partly due to the care with which genetics professionals manage family communications, they present an interesting legal question which. As genomic medicine becomes integrated into mainstream clinical practice, it seems likely that the number of these cases will increase

Recent case law
Competing duties?
Duty of confidence
The duty to warn
Drawing together the duty of confidence and the duty to warn
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call