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

Carol Levine
Citizens Commission on AIDS New York, NY

Kathleen Nolan, MD
The Hastings Center Briarcliff Manor, NY

JAMA. 1989;261(17):2501-2502.

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

To the Editor.—

Seeking informed consent in the medical setting has two possible outcomes: acceptance or refusal. To determine human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)—antibody prevalence in patients declining HIV-antibody testing in a sexually transmitted disease clinic, Hull et al¹ were prepared to honor a patient's acceptance of testing, but not his or her refusal.

A basic principle of medical ethics affirms that a competent person has the right to refuse medical interventions of any kind, even when others perceive them to be in the person's best interests. The clinic patients in this study were offered HIV-antibody testing; indeed, it was "recommended." Most (82%) accepted testing; 255 persons refused. The refusers' blood was then located and tested against their expressed wishes.

Were these patients harmed? Not in a physical way, to be sure, since their blood had already been drawn. Perhaps not even in a social or economic way, since the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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