PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S H Isaacman

Publications and source records attributed to S H Isaacman.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Patient's rights and doctor's rights: HIV-infected physicians and dentists on the cut edge.

Media, professional associations, public health agencies, legislators, and courts have focused attention to the problem of HIV-infected healthcare professionals. Practitioners should become aware of recently revised ethical guidelines, the doctrine of informed consent, court decisions, and legislation because of the effects these events have on practice and because patients will pose questions on these issues.

Dentistry↗
PubMed1991

Dumping HIV-infected patients from private practice.

Physicians in private practice believe they have the freedom to accept or exclude patients. While this may be true on an individual basis, discrimination towards a patient subpopulation violates professional principles and the law. Once the doctor-patient relationship is formed, physicians may not unilaterally and arbitrarily withdraw from the relationship based solely on the patient's human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) serostatus. This article reviews civil and human rights laws along with professional position statements on excluding individuals from care because of their serostatus.

Ethics, Medical↗
PubMed1991

Lose a piece of the rock: physician liability for failing to notify private third parties of HIV risk.

Since 1851, individuals have successfully sued physicians for injuries sustained through infectious disease transmission from the physicians' patients. Liability to third parties must be considered in the management of patients with infectious diseases. Because of this potential liability, physicians with human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients must consider notifying identified third parties of their respective risks of infection.

Confidentiality↗
PubMed1989

Notifying contacts of HIV-infected patients. Strategies to use until health agencies assume responsibility.

Although physicians have a moral and professional duty to prevent the spread of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) by seeing that the infected patient's contacts are informed of the risks, they have no legal guidelines on how to approach the problem. Medical organizations recommend that physicians notify an endangered third party if the infected patient refuses to cease high-risk activity and the authorities do not take action. However, many questions remain about practical application of these recommendations. Some federal recommendations place the burden of notifying the third party on the infected patient, then on the public health authority, and finally on the physician. However, these suggestions are not law. Legal precedent has placed responsibility on the physician for warning persons exposed to an infected patient that a risk exists. However, warning someone who is not clearly at risk can also invite a lawsuit. At present, there is no clear public policy to give guidance either. By considering the infectivity of the virus, injury potential of the infection, and the exposed person's relationship with the patient, the physician can better weigh the risk of breaching patient confidentiality versus ignoring the health dangers to the third party. Thorough counseling of the patient about infectivity, careful documentation of all conversations and efforts, and use of good judgment are the best tools that physicians have at present for handling this legal void.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗