Introduction

Over a long period, doctors have been known to be very secretive professionals. Medicine is among the professions where one is supposed to remain highly secretive and rarely disclose any information to their patients. One of the reasons why doctors and physicians fail to tell their patients the truth even after diagnosing them is to reduce their worries and anxieties. The relationship between the doctor and the patient has, however, changed over time as patients today demand to be told the truth concerning their diagnosis. While sometimes telling the truth to a patient does more harm than good, it is still an ethical dilemma whether the doctors should remain ignorant about all the implications that are likely to be associated with their honesty, and remain open and true to their patients. Doctors are often finding it hard to choose between keeping the diagnosis concealed or opening up and sharing everything about a diagnosis with their patients.

Doctors have a broad knowledge of most of the information related to various diagnoses. They tend to understand the chances of survival, the length that such a disease or infection would take to heal or kill a patient, and even whether the condition that a patient suffers from is curable or not. Patients, on the other hand, generally know minimal information to do with various infections. However, the advancements in technology have made it an easier task for patients to find out all the details and information related to any given disease. Some of the information may be traumatizing, and the patient may suffer greatly from such elements as worry and anxiety, which only worsens their condition. By understanding all these details, doctors face a hard time trying to decide whether they should really open up and share the information of diagnosis with their patients or instead treat them and keep the rest of the sensitive details, especially when it comes to terminal diseases concealed. If sharing the information related to a certain diagnosis will cause more harm than good by increasing the worries and anxieties of a patient, then it would be better for a doctor or a physician to keep the information about such a disease or condition concealed.

Besides, sharing information with a patient that they are infected with a terminal disease that has no cure makes them develop a negative attitude about themselves. No one wants to imagine their death and details to do with such diseases make patients develop fear by imagining that they are not going to recover. A doctor should spend a considerable amount of time trying to study and understand the psychology of their patients, especially those suffering from terminal and chronic illnesses instead of disclosing their diagnosis instantly. They should think of better ways of conveying the information and making patients understand that there are still chances that they could live more by embracing quality life practices. Such ways may include using a family member to honestly share the information while ensuring that the patient does not get to know about it instantly.

It is the responsibility of a doctor rather than treatment, to give hope to their patients and ensure that they are psychologically and emotionally stable even though they may be suffering from any types of diseases. As a result, any information that is likely to bring anxiety and worry to a patient should be concealed from them until such a time when they are strong enough to absorb such details. The doctor should, therefore, find a better means of communicating about such information to the patient when they are strong enough by making use of such a person like a family member.

Position

The following is my argument in disagreement withdoctors sharing the truth with their patients regarding delicate information like diagnosis and health status. It is not morally permissible because it is likely to cause much harm than good.

Argument

1. If full disclosure rules of doctors with patients force them to share everything about diagnosis are likely to cause much harm than good and decreases utility, then full disclosure rules are morally wrong.
2. Full disclosure rules of doctors with patientsthat force them to share everything about diagnosis are likely to cause much harm than good.
3. Thus, full disclosure rules of doctors with patientsthat force them to share everything about diagnosisare not morally permissib
4. Validity and definitions:

The validity of the outlined argument is discussed in a well-defined modus ponens structure. For better understanding, some of the terms employed in the above discussion include: Honesty refers to the act of saying the truth, without hiding or alliterating any given information. Honesty among doctors today results in great worries and anxieties since patients can find out all the information that is related to their conditions. In cases of chronic and terminal diseases, honest doctors who tell their patients where they are suffering from often cause more worries to the patient, and this worsens their conditions. Refrain: The term refers to abstaining from doing something. As such, doctors should refrain from giving out sensitive information to their patients, especially if it is related to terminal diseases. This is because it may result in greater negative implications such as increased worries and anxieties which, in turn,worsen the state of the patient.

Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?