Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Confidentiality in Genetic Testing

Confidentiality in Genetic Testing Open Pe er Commentaries whether or not the privilege granted to a professional com- References Doukas, D. J., and J . W. Berg. 2001. The f amily cove nant and ge - munication would remain intact when more than one in- netic testing. The A merican J ournal of Bioethics 1(3):2± 10. dividual is b rought into the discussion. Since the privilege Faustman, W . O., and D. J. Miller. 1987. Consi derations in was established between a single patient and his or h er prewarning clients of t he limita tions of c on® dentiality. Psychologi- physician, this im plies that there has been a dialogue as t o cal Reports 60:195. whether even marital, fam ily, or gr oup therapy conversa- Miller, D. J., and M. H. Thelen. 1986. Knowledge and beli efs about tions can remain con ned to t he involved parties. If not con® dentiality in psychotherapy. Professional Psychology: Re- privileged, can others—not part of t he covenant—gai n ac- search and Pra ctice 17:15. cess t o t he genetic information discussed? One can imag- Ð Ð Ð . 1987. Con® dentiality in psychotherapy: History, issues, and ine not only noncovenant family m http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Bioethics Taylor & Francis

Confidentiality in Genetic Testing

American Journal of Bioethics , Volume 1 (3): 2 – Jun 1, 2001
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/confidentiality-in-genetic-testing-KwOMPQnprS

References (3)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
1536-0075
eISSN
1526-5161
DOI
10.1162/152651601750417856
pmid
11954581
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Open Pe er Commentaries whether or not the privilege granted to a professional com- References Doukas, D. J., and J . W. Berg. 2001. The f amily cove nant and ge - munication would remain intact when more than one in- netic testing. The A merican J ournal of Bioethics 1(3):2± 10. dividual is b rought into the discussion. Since the privilege Faustman, W . O., and D. J. Miller. 1987. Consi derations in was established between a single patient and his or h er prewarning clients of t he limita tions of c on® dentiality. Psychologi- physician, this im plies that there has been a dialogue as t o cal Reports 60:195. whether even marital, fam ily, or gr oup therapy conversa- Miller, D. J., and M. H. Thelen. 1986. Knowledge and beli efs about tions can remain con ned to t he involved parties. If not con® dentiality in psychotherapy. Professional Psychology: Re- privileged, can others—not part of t he covenant—gai n ac- search and Pra ctice 17:15. cess t o t he genetic information discussed? One can imag- Ð Ð Ð . 1987. Con® dentiality in psychotherapy: History, issues, and ine not only noncovenant family m

Journal

American Journal of BioethicsTaylor & Francis

Published: Jun 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.