JME

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Author Affiliation
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Andorno, R
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Andorno, R
J Med Ethics 2004;30:435-439
© 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Institute of Medical Ethics


LAW, ETHICS AND MEDICINE

The right not to know: an autonomy based approach

R Andorno

Correspondence to:
R Andorno
Interdepartmental Center for Ethnics in the Sciences and Humanities (IZEW), University of Tübingen, Wilhelmstr. 19, 72074 Tübingen, Germany; roberto.andorno{at}uni-tuebingen.de
ABSTRACT
The emerging international biomedical law tends to recognise the right not to know one’s genetic status. However, the basis and conditions for the exercise of this right remain unclear in domestic laws. In addition to this, such a right has been criticised at the theoretical level as being in contradiction with patient’s autonomy, with doctors’ duty to inform patients, and with solidarity with family members. This happens especially when non-disclosure poses a risk of serious harm to the patient’s relatives who, without that vital information, could be deprived of preventive or therapeutic measures. This paper argues, firstly, that individuals may have a legitimate interest in not knowing their genetic make up to avoid serious psychological consequences; secondly, that this interest, far from being contrary to autonomy, may constitute an enhancement of autonomy; thirdly, that the right not to know cannot be presumed, but must be "activated" by the individual’s explicit choice, and fourthly, that this is not an absolute right, in the sense that it may be restricted when disclosure to the patient is necessary in order to avoid a risk of serious harm to third persons.


Keywords: genetic information; autonomy; right not to know




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Med. Genet.Home page
G K Suthers, J Armstrong, J McCormack, and D Trott
Letting the family know: balancing ethics and effectiveness when notifying relatives about genetic testing for a familial disorder
J. Med. Genet., August 1, 2006; 43(8): 665 - 670.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
D. Schmitz and U. Wiesing
Just a family medical history?
BMJ, February 4, 2006; 332(7536): 297 - 299.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Med. EthicsHome page
G Laurie
COMMENTARY
J. Med. Ethics, October 1, 2004; 30(5): 439 - 440.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2004 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Institute of Medical Ethics.