Virulent epidemics and scope of healthcare workers' duty of care

The phrase "duty of care" is, at best, too vague and, at worst, ethically dangerous. The nature and scope of the duty need to be determined, and conflicting duties must be recognized and acknowledged. Duty of care is neither fixed nor absolute but heavily dependent on context. The normal r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEmerging infectious diseases Vol. 12; no. 8; pp. 1238 - 1241
Main Author Sokol, Daniel K
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States U.S. National Center for Infectious Diseases 01.08.2006
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Subjects
avian influenza
bioethics
Care and treatment
Communicable diseases
Communicable Diseases - epidemiology
Communicable Diseases - therapy
Disease Outbreaks
duty of care
Epidemics
Ethics, Professional
Health Personnel - ethics
Humans
Influenza, Human - epidemiology
Influenza, Human - therapy
Medical personnel
Moral Obligations
Policy Review
Practice
SARS
United States
Virulence
United States
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The phrase "duty of care" is, at best, too vague and, at worst, ethically dangerous. The nature and scope of the duty need to be determined, and conflicting duties must be recognized and acknowledged. Duty of care is neither fixed nor absolute but heavily dependent on context. The normal risk level of the working environment, the healthcare worker's specialty, the likely harm and benefits of treatment, and the competing obligations deriving from the worker's multiple roles will all influence the limits of the duty of care. As experts anticipate the arrival of an avian influenza pandemic in humans, discussion of this matter is urgently needed.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
ISSN:1080-6040
1080-6059
DOI:10.3201/eid1208.060360