Should journalists be required to divulge their sources?
What about clergy, doctors and shrinks?
If someone commits a serious crime, and they tell their priest or minister about it is that clergy member obligated to rat?
What about doctor-patient confidence? Good thing or malarkey?
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
Confidentiality-I do not think certain people should have to divulge a known secret. A religious leader-I think things said to them in confidence should be kept, but they have to live with that knowledge afterwards. And answer to it in the next life.
A lawyer-yes, it is part of the justice process. They can know if their client did commit the crime, and others. But do not have to reveal that to the justice system.
Doctor-that one I have a problem. I confronted that with my husband when he became ill, they didn't tell me for 4 days how serious it was! One doctor finally took pity on my in the ICU, and showed me the scans. They had known all that time what was wrong, what his chances were, etc. They did not tell me. In fact, that doctor still didn't tell me, he showed me the CAT scan so I would know. They have to this day, never told me his chances. Because, they are amazed he is alive and does as well as he has.
A lawyer-yes, it is part of the justice process. They can know if their client did commit the crime, and others. But do not have to reveal that to the justice system.
Doctor-that one I have a problem. I confronted that with my husband when he became ill, they didn't tell me for 4 days how serious it was! One doctor finally took pity on my in the ICU, and showed me the scans. They had known all that time what was wrong, what his chances were, etc. They did not tell me. In fact, that doctor still didn't tell me, he showed me the CAT scan so I would know. They have to this day, never told me his chances. Because, they are amazed he is alive and does as well as he has.
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
RedGlitter;666017 wrote: Should journalists be required to divulge their sources?
What about clergy, doctors and shrinks?
If someone commits a serious crime, and they tell their priest or minister about it is that clergy member obligated to rat?
What about doctor-patient confidence? Good thing or malarkey?
Confidentiality laws have a place, and they also have clauses to provide for such information (crimes, etc.). I don't think they apply to clergy, however. For example, if one of my clients tells me he/she has intentions of harming someone, or themselves; or tells me of a serious crime they've committed against someone (ex.-child molestation), then I'm required to follow mandatory reporting, and contact the proper authorities. This is made clear to clients in the beginning, though, so they are aware of what can and cannot be divulged to outside parties.
As for doctor-patient, I totally believe in it. I deal with confidentiality, and it helps tremendously with client rapport-knowing they're information is safe, they tend to divulge more of it. In terms of the medical world, think of HIPAA. The primary reason for that was insurance problems. An example - in the past, an HIV positive patient's diagnosis could be divulged to a 3rd party, but this proved detrimental to the patient, as insurance companies would no longer cover them. With HIPAA, the patient's health and privacy comes first.
Now, for Chonsi's problems. I don't agree with that. As his spouse, you'd think they would fully disclose the condition to you, in order for you to accommodate appropriately. i suppose, as with all laws, there are always problems.
What about clergy, doctors and shrinks?
If someone commits a serious crime, and they tell their priest or minister about it is that clergy member obligated to rat?
What about doctor-patient confidence? Good thing or malarkey?
Confidentiality laws have a place, and they also have clauses to provide for such information (crimes, etc.). I don't think they apply to clergy, however. For example, if one of my clients tells me he/she has intentions of harming someone, or themselves; or tells me of a serious crime they've committed against someone (ex.-child molestation), then I'm required to follow mandatory reporting, and contact the proper authorities. This is made clear to clients in the beginning, though, so they are aware of what can and cannot be divulged to outside parties.
As for doctor-patient, I totally believe in it. I deal with confidentiality, and it helps tremendously with client rapport-knowing they're information is safe, they tend to divulge more of it. In terms of the medical world, think of HIPAA. The primary reason for that was insurance problems. An example - in the past, an HIV positive patient's diagnosis could be divulged to a 3rd party, but this proved detrimental to the patient, as insurance companies would no longer cover them. With HIPAA, the patient's health and privacy comes first.
Now, for Chonsi's problems. I don't agree with that. As his spouse, you'd think they would fully disclose the condition to you, in order for you to accommodate appropriately. i suppose, as with all laws, there are always problems.
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
I think it's a case by case thing until it becomes a matter of some one hurting someone else or an animal. Then divulge away.
�You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.�
• Mae West
• Mae West
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
RedGlitter;666017 wrote: Should journalists be required to divulge their sources?
What about clergy, doctors and shrinks?
If someone commits a serious crime, and they tell their priest or minister about it is that clergy member obligated to rat?
What about doctor-patient confidence? Good thing or malarkey?
If an investigative journalist comes across something corrupt being done by a company or govt then revealing his sources puts them at risk-that the source goes to the press rather than the police suggests they have reason to be fearful or concern that the crime will not be investigated properly.
A free press reporting on the wrongdoing's of individuals, companies or govt is essential to a free society. If a journalist can't follow a story without fear of being forced to reveal their sources we will have problems. If wrong he can be sued for slander if right it is essential they should be able to report-imagine if there had been no watergate scandal because the press were frightened to report what they found.
Clergy, doctors and shrinks:IMO confidentiality is essential and any failing to abide by it should lose their licence to practice or whatever. Do you really want a Doctor or accountant or lawyer or shrink discussing your affairs with others? If you can't talk in confidence to your lawyer then how can you have a fair trial? As one lawyer put it to me-it is my duty to point out the evidence is rather overwhelming and he should plead guilty but if my clients says he is not guilty it is my duty to defend him to the best of my ability. If you don't have lawyer client confidentiality and a jury system you have a police state.
Knowing about a crime and not reporting it is a different matter. Don't know how catholic priests stand if someone confesses to them in the confession box.
posted by chonsgirl
Doctor-that one I have a problem. I confronted that with my husband when he became ill, they didn't tell me for 4 days how serious it was! One doctor finally took pity on my in the ICU, and showed me the scans. They had known all that time what was wrong, what his chances were, etc. They did not tell me. In fact, that doctor still didn't tell me, he showed me the CAT scan so I would know. They have to this day, never told me his chances. Because, they are amazed he is alive and does as well as he has.
You were not the patient so they would only discuss it with you as next of kin. but perhaps your husband told them to keep it from you rather than have you worry. It was his choice, I assume, not yours or theirs to make for him. I can understand why a husband would do that.
What about clergy, doctors and shrinks?
If someone commits a serious crime, and they tell their priest or minister about it is that clergy member obligated to rat?
What about doctor-patient confidence? Good thing or malarkey?
If an investigative journalist comes across something corrupt being done by a company or govt then revealing his sources puts them at risk-that the source goes to the press rather than the police suggests they have reason to be fearful or concern that the crime will not be investigated properly.
A free press reporting on the wrongdoing's of individuals, companies or govt is essential to a free society. If a journalist can't follow a story without fear of being forced to reveal their sources we will have problems. If wrong he can be sued for slander if right it is essential they should be able to report-imagine if there had been no watergate scandal because the press were frightened to report what they found.
Clergy, doctors and shrinks:IMO confidentiality is essential and any failing to abide by it should lose their licence to practice or whatever. Do you really want a Doctor or accountant or lawyer or shrink discussing your affairs with others? If you can't talk in confidence to your lawyer then how can you have a fair trial? As one lawyer put it to me-it is my duty to point out the evidence is rather overwhelming and he should plead guilty but if my clients says he is not guilty it is my duty to defend him to the best of my ability. If you don't have lawyer client confidentiality and a jury system you have a police state.
Knowing about a crime and not reporting it is a different matter. Don't know how catholic priests stand if someone confesses to them in the confession box.
posted by chonsgirl
Doctor-that one I have a problem. I confronted that with my husband when he became ill, they didn't tell me for 4 days how serious it was! One doctor finally took pity on my in the ICU, and showed me the scans. They had known all that time what was wrong, what his chances were, etc. They did not tell me. In fact, that doctor still didn't tell me, he showed me the CAT scan so I would know. They have to this day, never told me his chances. Because, they are amazed he is alive and does as well as he has.
You were not the patient so they would only discuss it with you as next of kin. but perhaps your husband told them to keep it from you rather than have you worry. It was his choice, I assume, not yours or theirs to make for him. I can understand why a husband would do that.
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
My husband could not talk, he was pre-coma. He didn't talk for two months. I think the doctors kept it from me, because they expected him to die, and finally told me to be prepared. I think they should have told me from the beginning, but then, I would not have done the things I did afterwards that lead to him eventually coming home. After about 3 weeks with no prognosis, I threw a fit and had to take the old "doctor" out of the bag, to threaten them into telling me. Their attitude changed, and doctors would talk some then. But that was an unfair advantage for me, what about the other patient's families? They were left with no comments, reassurances or warnings about what would come.
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
chonsi are you power of attorney? over your husband? the new confidentiality laws are so strict..they may have not really known when or if your husband would die or get better...
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
Yes, I have power of attorney now. I know they didn't know any answers then, but they totally would not reveal how ill he was either. I never filed complaints against them, but I do feel sorry for others who are treated that way. The spouse should be told.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
chonsigirl;666247 wrote: Yes, I have power of attorney now. I know they didn't know any answers then, but they totally would not reveal how ill he was either. I never filed complaints against them, but I do feel sorry for others who are treated that way. The spouse should be told.
I completely agree with you, Chonsi. Spouse or other family members, I feel should be told. I thought the days when that info was kept from patient and family were long gone but I guess not. Although, thinking about it, nobody told us my mother was dying...looking back, the clues were everywhere but no one leveled with us except one nurse who accidentally let it slip, thinking we already knew.
I completely agree with you, Chonsi. Spouse or other family members, I feel should be told. I thought the days when that info was kept from patient and family were long gone but I guess not. Although, thinking about it, nobody told us my mother was dying...looking back, the clues were everywhere but no one leveled with us except one nurse who accidentally let it slip, thinking we already knew.
-
DelicateDominatrix
- Posts: 535
- Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 2:15 pm
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
I think it depends on the situation.If a person commits a murder to a priest.He should (the priest) tell the police.I know its a violation,but the person he killed got a worse violation,they got a death sentence 
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
Tell me something in confidence, and I will keep it secret Only if it does not harm others. 
Behaviour breeds behaviour - treat people how you would like to be treated yourself
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
chonsigirl;666214 wrote: My husband could not talk, he was pre-coma. He didn't talk for two months. I think the doctors kept it from me, because they expected him to die, and finally told me to be prepared. I think they should have told me from the beginning, but then, I would not have done the things I did afterwards that lead to him eventually coming home. After about 3 weeks with no prognosis, I threw a fit and had to take the old "doctor" out of the bag, to threaten them into telling me. Their attitude changed, and doctors would talk some then. But that was an unfair advantage for me, what about the other patient's families? They were left with no comments, reassurances or warnings about what would come.
That puts a different light on it. I would agree with you there. As next of kin you should have been informed. Misplaced concern to spare your feelings perhaps. I find it hard top credit they were just being petty.
That puts a different light on it. I would agree with you there. As next of kin you should have been informed. Misplaced concern to spare your feelings perhaps. I find it hard top credit they were just being petty.
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
woppy71;666472 wrote: Tell me something in confidence, and I will keep it secret Only if it does not harm others.
Well obviously you cant be trusted with the "good stuff"
Well obviously you cant be trusted with the "good stuff"
I AM AWESOME MAN
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
Nomad;667394 wrote: Well obviously you cant be trusted with the "good stuff"
I dunno. Buy me a six pack and you never know....:wah:
I dunno. Buy me a six pack and you never know....:wah:
Behaviour breeds behaviour - treat people how you would like to be treated yourself
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
It all depends on the seriousness of the confession. If it was regarding something bad or cruel then yes they should divulge what they have been told.
Keep Confidences or Rat Them Out?
RedGlitter;666258 wrote: I completely agree with you, Chonsi. Spouse or other family members, I feel should be told. I thought the days when that info was kept from patient and family were long gone but I guess not. Although, thinking about it, nobody told us my mother was dying...looking back, the clues were everywhere but no one leveled with us except one nurse who accidentally let it slip, thinking we already knew.
My experiences with my parents death were totally the opposite. Their doctors kept my stepmom, my sister, and I abreast of every single thing that came along with my father, from day one when we had to place him on a transplant list. In addition, with my mother, we were always given the truth about the severity of her condition and the expected prognosis - and that was almost 15 years ago. I suppose it depends on where you live as well.
My experiences with my parents death were totally the opposite. Their doctors kept my stepmom, my sister, and I abreast of every single thing that came along with my father, from day one when we had to place him on a transplant list. In addition, with my mother, we were always given the truth about the severity of her condition and the expected prognosis - and that was almost 15 years ago. I suppose it depends on where you live as well.