Aids

Human rights and public health

Datos Bibliográficos

ID2150879
AutoresCarol A Tauer (St. Catherine University, autor de correspondencia)
Año1989
Volumen10
Número2-3
Páginas177-192
Fecha de publicación1989-03-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaMedical Anthropology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0145-9740 • E-ISSN: 1545-5882
EditorialInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/01459740.1989.9965963
PMID2725205
OpenAlexW2057078859
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas4
Referencias citadas27

This paper considers human rights and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) focusing on the distinctive approaches of France and Great Britain in medical and civil rights and relating significant aspects of their responses to that of the US. As regards the issue of confidentiality or the personal control of private information the US is characterized as the least sensitive mandating national reporting of AIDS in contrast to Great Britain where reporting is voluntary and medical records are less accessible. Both countries allow exceptions either to protect a 3rd party or for the sake of the common good unlike France where the sacredness of medical confidences are compared to religion. These policies impact on research. Great Britain and France have maintained a more paternalistic view of the role of the physician in the area of informed consent and the right to know than the US. Drug trials with volunteers are common practice in the US although repugnant in France. While the US encourages testing for HIV the British question the value of testing and the French advocate it only for blood donors. Mass education and counseling programs are backed by the British government while France has been reluctant to openly discuss the disease. The US investment in sex education is described as restrained. Frances lags behind in quarantine and other restrictive policies. However a common thread in laws about AIDS among US states Great Britain and Sweden is some explicit provision for an imminent threat to the health of others. Great Britain does not enunciate the rights of individuals in a constitution or other fundamental document rather a mutual atmosphere of respect and trust exists between the government and the individual. France on the other hand has a forceful and detailed declaration of rights which is reflected in her resistence to collect epidemiological data. The US policy lies somewhere between Great Britain and France. Though the rights of homosexuals are protected in some jurisdictions of the US there is no general protection as exists for minorities

Confidentiality · Economic growth · Economics · Government (linguistics · Human rights · Paternalism · Political science · Presumption · HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk · Law · Medicine · Privacy, Security, and Data Protection · Public Administration · Reproductive Health and Technologies