Against Confidentiality?

Author:

Clark Chris1

Affiliation:

1. University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

Abstract

Summary: This paper presents a critique of the ethic of confidentiality in the personal service professions. Drawing on research in social work, medicine, psychiatry and related fields, on philosophical professional ethics and on current thinking in law, it argues that the idea of ‘confidentiality’ conflates a number of ends that are frequently in tension or incompatible. These comprise personal privacy, the safety of vulnerable individuals and the wider third party or public interest. Findings: Professionals and the interested public should not be misled by the traditional idea of confidentiality as constituting in itself a cardinal principle of professional ethics. Nevertheless, difficult conflicts of interests will still arise. It is suggested that liberal rights theory, the source of standard professional ethical codes, is inadequate to resolve these conflicts. Professional ethics needs to be complemented by a more communitarian view of private and public interests. Applications: Good practice should focus on achieving the best balance of personal privacy, the safety of vulnerable individuals and the protection of the wider public in the context of a view of society devoted to the realization of the communal good as much as to the defence of individual interests.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Health(social science)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3