Article info
PDFClinical ethics
Commentary
The ethics of non-consensual HIV testing are not substantively different from the ethics of overriding the right not to know a test result
- Correspondence to Dr Charles Foster, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, The Ethox Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LG, UK; Charles.Foster{at}gtc.ox.ac.uk
Citation
The ethics of non-consensual HIV testing are not substantively different from the ethics of overriding the right not to know a test result
Publication history
- Received November 6, 2015
- Accepted December 21, 2015
- First published January 25, 2016.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Other content recommended for you
- HIV and the right not to know: a reply to replies
- HIV and the right not to know
- Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on medical law
- Capturing and promoting the autonomy of capacitous vulnerable adults
- Human rights and ethical considerations for a tobacco-free generation
- The case of biobank with the law: between a legal and scientific fiction
- The Human Rights Act 1998 and medical treatment: time for re-examination
- Patient autonomy in an East-Asian cultural milieu: a critique of the individualism-collectivism model
- Spoonful of honey or a gallon of vinegar? A conditional COVID-19 vaccination policy for front-line healthcare workers
- Identity, personhood and the law: a response to Ashcroft and McGee