Medical ethics: confidentiality and HIV: practice question

A Forensic Medicine question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Forensic Medicine · Medical ethics: confidentiality and HIV

Sample item

A man known to be HIV-positive plans to marry and has refused to tell his fiancée. In Mr X v. Hospital Z (1998) the Supreme Court considered whether the hospital could inform her. What was held?

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

B. Disclosure to the prospective spouse is permitted, since her right to life prevails over confidentiality

In Mr X v. Hospital Z, the Supreme Court held that the duty of confidentiality is not absolute and that disclosure to the person at risk, here the woman he was about to marry, is justified because her right to life under Article 21 outweighs his right to privacy. The disclosure should be limited to the person who needs to know. Confidentiality may also give way to a court order or notification requirements.

Option by option

  • A. Disclosure is never permitted, since confidentiality is absolute

    Confidentiality is not absolute, and the court recognised exceptions.

  • B. Disclosure to the prospective spouse is permitted, since her right to life prevails over confidentiality (correct)

    Correct. A person at serious risk may be told, as her right to life outweighs the patient's privacy.

  • C. Disclosure is permitted only to the man's employer

    Disclosure to an employer is not justified by any risk to life.

  • D. Disclosure is permitted only to the press

    Disclosure to the press has no justification and would breach confidentiality.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

More Forensic Medicine questions

Questions about this Forensic Medicine question

What is the answer to this Forensic Medicine question?

The best answer is B, Disclosure to the prospective spouse is permitted, since her right to life prevails over confidentiality. In Mr X v.

Why is "Disclosure is never permitted, since confidentiality is absolute" not the answer?

Confidentiality is not absolute, and the court recognised exceptions.

Why is "Disclosure is permitted only to the man's employer" not the answer?

Disclosure to an employer is not justified by any risk to life.

Why is "Disclosure is permitted only to the press" not the answer?

Disclosure to the press has no justification and would breach confidentiality.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Medical ethics: confidentiality and HIV in Forensic Medicine. Hospital Z, the Supreme Court held that the duty of confidentiality is not absolute and that disclosure to the person at risk, here the woman he was about to marry, is justified because her right to life under Article 21 outweighs his right to privacy. The disclosure should be limited to the person who needs to know. Confidentiality may also give way to a court order or notification requirements.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as a multi-step question: it asks you to combine more than one idea. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Medical ethics: confidentiality and HIV?

Learn postmortem changes with their timelines, and toxicology as poison, sign, test and antidote. Then use the flashcards and the other Forensic Medicine questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.