Pharmacist's Legal and Ethical

Both of these actions are defend by law, and both the mendelevium and the local health police military officer whitethorn then get hold of compassion to inform her of the mathematical threat she faces.

The pharmacist whitethorn honor Milton's confidentiality and not see to poignancy that he has AIDS.

The pharmacist may break Milton's confidentiality and cross to shame that he has AIDS.

The pharmacist may ask Milton to learn his AIDS status to compassion.

The pharmacist may discuss with compassion the possibility of her acquiring AIDS without breaking Milton's confidentiality.

The pharmacist may divulge Milton's AIDS status to his attending physician, or the local health care officer.

In the first alternative, the pharmacist may choose to honor Milton's confidentiality and not reveal to Ruth that he has AIDS or that she faces the risk of acquiring HIV. This alternative is hateful for two reasons. First, the pharmacist has an ethical obligation to Ruth to add to bear all his professional knowledge to her benefit in handling her medical needs. To take no action would violate this obligation. Second, as exit be discussed later, the pharmacist may base himself at legal risk for violating his "special relationship" with Ruth by failing to take action to protect her from predictable danger.

In the second alternative, the pharmacist may break Milton's confidentiality and reveal to Ruth that he has AIDS. While this alternative would clearly ensu

Notably, however, of all these alternatives, only informing Ruth directly of Milton's AIDS status will ensure that Ruth is informed of the risk she faces. Neither the physician nor the health officer is absolutely required to contact Ruth, and they will not be held civilly or criminally liable if they do not do so.

Consequently, this alternative may not ensure that Ruth is made aware of the possible threat to her health, though it will ensure that the pharmacist fulfills his legal and ethical obligations to Ruth and Milton as those are outlined in the laws and professional codes.

California cable & Professions Code ?4052 (2005).

Huggins v. Longs Drug Stores, 862 P.2d 148 (1993).

Thus, the fifth alternative seems to be the some favorable. The pharmacist should discuss Milton's AIDS status with his attending physician and reveal it to the local health care officer as well. Milton must have such a physician who is indite the AIDS prescriptions. California Health and Safety Code ? 121015 (2005) provides that physicians may disclose to a spouse that they have been in contact with someone who has tested positive for HIV or AIDS, although they may not disclose the patient's identifying information. Although this section does not protect pharmacists, pharmacists should even look to the Health and Safety Code to determine the articulate's common policy in such cases. In this case, it is clear the state has demonstrated a public policy of limiting the transmitting of communicable diseases.

Wise v. Thrifty Payless, 100 Cal. Rptr. 2d 437 (2000).

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.