Amazon.com Widgets

Should people's medical records be confidential when they have a potentially dangerous afflication like HIV/AIDs?

  • It's not dangerous.

    Yes, a person's medical records should be confidential when they have a potentially dangerous affliction like HIV/AIDS, because HIV is not a dangerous, transmittable disease. HIV is spread with intravenous needle use, and it is spread by homosexual sex. Stay away from those things, and a person's HIV status is not relevant to you.

  • Yes They Should

    I believe people's medical records should be confidential especially when they have a potentially dangerous affliction like HIV/AIDs. People are too quick to judge people in modern society and releasing medical records would simply make the problem worse. It would not be a benefit to society to make others medical records available.

  • Confidentiality is not dependent on the nature of the disease.

    People with dangerous diseases should be able to expect their records to be as confidential as any other patient. The only people who will see the records are health professionals and it's hard to see how the information would be helpful to anyone else. The only reason I can think of why someone who isn't a health professional might want access to these records would be to use them as an excuse to discriminate.

  • No, people's medical records should be available regardless.

    I do not think that people's medical records should be confidential just because they have a potentially dangerous affliction like HIV/AIDS. I think that such info should be made available since it might be important for some people to know such data. I think it would be dangerous for some workplaces for example.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.