ATTENTION: The software behind KU ScholarWorks is being upgraded to a new version. Starting July 15th, users will not be able to log in to the system, add items, nor make any changes until the new version is in place at the end of July. Searching for articles and opening files will continue to work while the system is being updated.
If you have any questions, please contact Marianne Reed at mreed@ku.edu .
Ethical Concerns with Opt-Out Testing in Comparison to Voluntary Counseling Testing
dc.contributor.author | White, Monica | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2009-07-02T20:11:08Z | |
dc.date.available | 2009-07-02T20:11:08Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2009-07-02 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2271/751 | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | HIV testing is now placed under the general consent to treat. What is not clear are the cost and consequences that accompany these CDC recommendations (Holtgrave, 2007). Written informed consent promotes patient information and awareness, while protecting patients and physicians; omitting counseling and disclosures may eliminate patient education about HIV and high risk behaviors (Donoghoe, Lane, & Wolf, 2007). The ethical issue with routine testing is the elimination of HIV test specific written consent and pretest counseling. The lack of adequate information related to patients rights to refuse testing along with the risks and benefits are also ethical concerns. Routine testing may be met with barriers from individual states. Most states have pretest counseling incorporated in their HIV testing laws (Donoghoe, Lane, & Wolf, 2007). Opt-out testing may come with consequences such as failure to reduce high risk behavior (Holtgrave, 2007). | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.title | Ethical Concerns with Opt-Out Testing in Comparison to Voluntary Counseling Testing | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.accessrights | openAccess | en_US |
dc.subject.cinahl | Ethics, Medical | en_US |
dc.subject.cinahl | Consent | en_US |