The main ethical conflict in the case is that an ob-gyn doctor disclosed a client’s medical records to a third party without the client’s consent. This was a blatant disregard for the ethical code of conduct as well as a violation of the relevant law, The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1966 (HIPAA.) The said law requires sensitive patient health information not to be disclosed without the patient’s knowledge or consent. It seems that the doctor was collaborating with the child’s father to build a paternity hearing case that was being heard in court. The ethical dilemma was, therefore, on the doctor’s side, where he was torn between preserving the medical records or disclosing them to the father of the child. The doctor chose the latter, a fact that led to robbing the led to her happiness and rights. This problem can be analyzed and solved using three ethical theories.
Deontological Theory
Philosopher Immanuel Kant developed this ethical theory on the principle that the nature of an action is more important than its consequences. For an action to be good, then it has to start by observing laid out rules and regulations (Lazar & Graham, 2021.) In this case, therefore, the deontological theory would ask whether the actions of the doctor were lawful from the beginning. It is a fact that HIPAA law prohibits medical professionals from revealing patients’ health information to other parties without the patient’s permission. It is not moral then, according to Immanuel Kant, the actions of the doctor.
Utilitarianism Theory
Utilitarian philosophers describe the morality of actions in terms of whether they lead to happiness or unhappiness, pleasure or pain (Everett & Kahane, 2020.) Moral actions are those whose consequences lead to happiness and pleasure. The opposite is also true. From the case then, we can say that the doctor’s actions were not moral. This is because they led to unhappiness and pain for the lady whose privacy and right were infringed. Because the consequences of the doctor’s actions were not positive, we can say that the utilitarian theory was violated.
Virtue Ethics Theory
This is a theory developed by Aristotle and other ancient Greeks. It is a theory that places the character and virtues of an individual before determining the rightness of his or her actions. It presupposes that individuals acquire virtue through practice. The doctor’s character, in this case, is one that brings to question the legitimacy of his actions. Not abiding by professional code of conduct is, by all means, a lack of fidelity to work ethics. Therefore, the doctor’s actions should be treated as such.
Conclusion
I believe the utilitarianism theory offers the best solution to this ethical dilemma. This is because there is consequentialism all over the case. The doctor’s actions led the father of the child to further her paternal hearing case against his wife. The father got what he wanted. On the other hand, the doctor’s actions revealed to the lady invasion of her privacy and rights, much to her disappointment. This disappointment led her to go to court and ask for her rights. Again there was consequence here as she eventually got her rights. Based on which scenario one looks at in the case, there is both happiness and pain as consequences of actions done by others. The lady is unhappy and hurt by the action of the doctor to expose her medical records. The lady is relieved and happy too, when she finally gets her rights.
References
Everett, J. A., & Kahane, G. (2020). Switching tracks? Towards a multidimensional model of utilitarian psychology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(2), 124-134.
Lazar, S., & Graham, P. A. (2021). Deontological decision theory and lesser-evil options. Synthese, 198(7), 6889-6916.
write