A physician's duty to warn family members of genetic risks: limiting the importance of Tarasoff.
This paper addresses whether a physician should be held liable for failing to warn family members of potential risks of genetic disease. Resolution of this complex issue requires consideration of physician-patient responsibility, the psychological impact of the warning, the efficacy of genetic testing, and the need to protect the physical well being of family members. The paper concludes that application of the Tarasoff factors, which focus primarily on the foreseeable aspect of the threat and the identifiable nature of the third parties, is an insufficient means for determining whether this duty to disclose exists. Instead, in addition to the Tarasoff factors, a physician must consider a number of case-specific factors in deciding whether the benefits of disclosure outweigh the psychological effects of knowing of the disease and the public policy reasons behind physician-patient confidentiality. Likewise, a court should consider these same factors as applied to a hypothetical "reasonable physician" before concluding that a specific physician has a duty to warn family members potential of genetic threats.
Russell
Scott
S
Boston University School of Law, USA.
D003141:Communicable Diseases; D003219:Confidentiality / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D017007:Duty to Warn / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005190:Family; D030342:Genetic Diseases, Inborn; D030661:Genetic Privacy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005820:Genetic Testing / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D016365:Liability, Legal; D010820:Physicians / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D012306:Risk; D014481:United States