States rule differently on subject of AIDS and disclosure of a blood donor's identity.
Last month, Dr. Decker analyzed recent court decisions that maintain the standard that providing blood and human tissue is a service, not a sale of goods. Under most conditions, he concluded, hospitals can't be held liable for damages to a patient who acquires an infectious virus from blood transfusions or tissue transplants. This month, Dr. Decker considers the effect of AIDS on rulings dealing with the disclosure of a blood donor's identity. In 1988, the Supreme Court of the United States twice declined to review lower court decisions dealing with the disclosure of the names of blood donors in situations where the recipient had contracted AIDS. The issues are complex and require the balancing of conflicting rights. Further, previous decisions have not been consistent from one state to another. Hospital materials managers must understand the issues involved in the court decisions as they carry out their responsibility to the hospital and its patients to provide the safest possible supply of blood. In this dialogue, Dr. Decker reviews the case law and develops the issues.
D000163:Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome / Q000517:prevention & control*; D001771:Blood Banks / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D001782:Blood Donors; D003219:Confidentiality / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D014481:United States