These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Truth and confidentiality at the bedside. Legal evaluation].
    Author: Laum HD.
    Journal: Zentralbl Chir; 2000; 125(11):920-5. PubMed ID: 11143519.
    Abstract:
    Some experts postulate a doctor's "therapeutic privilege" on limited medical information, if complete information would overstrain the patient psychologically or if absolutely necessary therapy probably would be refused for incomprehensible reasons. The German Federal Court, however, does not conform with this opinion. According to its jurisdiction the doctor is obliged to considerate information, but only allowed to neglect full information, if the declaration of the diagnosis would cause a serious and irreparable damage to the patient's health. Causing concern, depression or deterioration of the patient's general condition, however, is regarded as inevitable detriment. If the patient does not agree to a radiotherapy, the doctor must not shy away from disclosing the cancer diagnosis. Reducing medical information is therefore only allowed in exceptional cases, because otherwise the patient's right of self-determination would be undermined. Until now the Federal Court did not accept reduction of medical information for therapeutic reasons in one single decision. Though the doctor must not disclose cancer diagnosis if the patient doesn't ask about it, he will have to inform him about the risks of the indicated therapy. The patient, however, has the right to waive information. His renunciation, however, has to be unambiguous and has to be documented contemporarily.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]