A surgeon knows that his patient, who is about to marry, is HIV positive. The patient explicitly forbids him from disclosing this to anyone. Based on Mr 'X' v Hospital 'Z' (Supreme Court of India, 1998), what is the legally correct course of action regarding the patient's fiancee?
- A The doctor may disclose the status to the fiancee, as she is a directly exposed party whose right to life outweighs confidentiality ✓
- B Disclosure is prohibited because doctor-patient confidentiality is absolute
- C Only the police can be informed, since HIV is a notifiable disease
- D The doctor must obtain a court order before any disclosure
Correct answer: A. The doctor may disclose the status to the fiancee, as she is a directly exposed party whose right to life outweighs confidentiality
Explanation
In Mr 'X' v Hospital 'Z', the Supreme Court held that the duty of confidentiality yields where there is an imminent risk to a specific identifiable third party. Disclosure to the fiancee was justified because she faced a real risk of infection through marriage, and her right to life under Article 21 prevailed over the patient's privacy. HIV is not a notifiable disease in India, killing option C.
Reference: Parikh's Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence, Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 7th ed.
High-yield for: NEET PGINI-CETNExTFMGEUSMLEPLABMRCP
Written and medically reviewed by the StethoPrep medical team.