PubMed · 3641249
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Quest. NT's educational supplement.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3641249/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility is already part of the clinical management of families with some of the well-defined (but uncommon) inherited cancer syndromes. In cases where the risks associated with a predisposing mutation are less certain, or where there is no clearly effective intervention to offer those with a positive result, its use is more controversial. Careful evaluation of costs and benefits, and of the efficacy of interventions in those found to be at risk, is essential and is only just beginning. An immediate challenge is to ensure that both health professionals and the public understand clearly the issues involved.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To provide clinical guidelines for primary care physicians who are dealing with domestic abuse and who have both the abused woman and her partner as patients. PARTICIPANTS: A 15-member expert panel with members having experience in family practice, gynecology, emergency medicine, medical ethics, nursing, psychology, law, and social work; an 11-member consulting group with members representing medicine, consumers, police, psychology, social work, and nursing; and participants from focus groups including 48 previously abused women and 10 previously abusive men. Members of the expert panel and the consulting group were recruited by the research team. Focus group members were recruited through the agencies from which they were receiving services. EVIDENCE: Available research information, and opinions of the expert panel, the consulting group, and the focus group participants. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Scoring of 144 clinical scenarios was performed by the expert panel using a modified Delphi technique involving 4 iterations. Scenarios were rated in terms of best practice for primary care physicians dealing with suspected and confirmed cases of physical abuse. Consulting group members and focus group participants then commented on the panel's results. Final guidelines were approved by the panel and the consulting group, with comments reserved in the guidelines for information from focus group participants. CONCLUSIONS: It is not a conflict of interest for the physician to deal with abuse of the female partner when both partners are patients. Both patients have a right to autonomy, confidentiality, honesty, and quality care. Patients should be dealt with independently, thereby facilitating assessment of the magnitude and severity of the victim's injuries. Physicians should not discuss the possibility of domestic abuse with the male partner without the prior consent of the abused female partner. Joint counseling is generally inadvisable and should be attempted only when the violence has ended, provided both partners give independent consent and the physician has adequate training and skills to deal with the situation without escalating the violence. If the physician feels unable to deal effectively with either patient because of the dual relationship, referral to another qualified physician is preferred.