This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

An Ethical Framework for Evaluating Proposed Programs

Ronald Bayer, PhD; Carol Levine, MA; Susan M. Wolf, JD

JAMA. 1986;256(13):1768-1774.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

THE ACQUIRED immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) poses a compelling ethical challenge to medicine, science, public health, the legal system, and our political democracy. This report focuses on one aspect of that challenge: the use of blood tests to identify individuals who have been infected with the retrovirus human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In this article we follow the terminology recently proposed by the International Committee on the Taxonomy of Viruses; that is, we use the term human immunodeficiency virus. This replaces the more cumbersome dual terminology of human T-cell lymphotropic virus type III/lymphadenopathy-associated virus (HTLV-III/ LAV).

The issue is urgent the tests are already in use and plans to implement them much more broadly are being proposed.¹ The issue is also complex: at stake is a potential conflict between the community's interests in stopping the spread of a devastating disease and in preserving important values of individual liberty and equal rights. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From The Hastings Center, Hastings-on-Hudson, NY. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to The Hastings Center, 360 Broadway, Hastings-on-Hudson, NY 10706 (Ms Levine).

Important to consider will be pertinent constitutional provisions, laws, and legal precedent on the federal, state, and local levels, such as the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, the Federal Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 USC 794, state statutes such as California Health and Safety Code Chapter 1.11 199.20 et seq, city ordinances such as the San Francisco Police Code Article 38, and judicial decisions such as Codero vs Coughlin, No. 84, Civ 728 (SD NY 1984); District 27 Community School Board vs Board of Education, 130 Misc 2d 398, 502 NYS2d 325 (NY Sup 1986); South Florida Blood Service, Inc vs Rasmussen, 467 S2d 798 (Fla App 1985); and La Rocca vs Dalsheim, 120 Misc 2d 697; 467 NYS2d 302 (NY Sup 1983). This list is by no means exhaustive, and the specifics of any screening or testing proposal will dictate the legal research required.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?