ArticlePDF Available

The Physician Who Knew Too Much: A Comment on Watters v White

Authors:

Abstract

With the sequencing of the human genome in 2003, the role of medical genetics in health care continues to expand. While allowing for new opportunities, especially in personalised medicine, this developing field also creates uncertainty about the duties physicians owe their patients. An area of particular controversy is the scope of the physician's duty to inform relatives of a patient of potentially important genetic information. The 2010 Quebec Superior Court decision Liss v Watters dealt with such an issue. The central allegation in this case was that two physicians failed to inform the mother and relatives of a patient affected by a genetic condition of their carrier status. In this case, the Quebec Court of Appeal ultimately concluded that the duty to inform could not be expanded without undermining the physician's duty to uphold professional secrecy. While the alleged faults in this case took place decades ago, Watters v White poses key questions about physician duties to communicate genetic information. First and foremost, does a physician have a duty to inform patients' relatives of serious genetic risks? If so, what is the scope of this duty? What sorts of genetic risks must be communicated? Which relatives should be informed? Does physician-patient confidentiality bar such communications? If so, must physicians seek alternative means to ensure that at-risk individuals are informed? Important issues of causation also arise in Watters v White. This case commentary begins by outlining the facts of this case. Next, the reasoning and conclusions of both the trial and Court of Appeal judgments are discussed. The commentary concludes with a discussion of the implications of this case for physicians in today's rapidly evolving genetic milieu.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Chapter
This chapter surveys law and policy approaches to the return of individual genomic findings in health research and the oversight role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). We review legal principles influencing return, including fiduciary duties, the duty to rescue, and the right to know (or not). We also identify core elements of applicable laws and policies, illustrated with international examples. A common requirement is for researchers to develop an ethics-approved plan for handling findings. Another is to seek consent to return, though some jurisdictions make exceptions for serious findings. Some policies recommend offering individuals granular choices about return. Common criteria for determining what should be returned are the quality and usefulness of the finding. Processes must be established for assessing potential findings and communicating them to participants. Finally, we consider the return of individual genomic findings to participants who lack the capacity to consent and within international collaborations.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
In much the same way that genomic technologies are changing the landscape of biomedical research, the ethical issues these technologies generate are setting today’s agenda of ethics research. The distinct ethical issues concerning the management of incidental findings represent a serious challenge that has occupied the minds of Western bioethicists for a while, but has yet to capture due attention from specialists in the Muslim world. Incidental findings are generally defined as results that arise although they were not part of the original purpose of the research project or clinical test. Ethical management of these findings is not a simple matter, because while they can be lifesaving, they can also lead to harmful consequences for the individual and community at large, and at other times lack any clear significance. This study is an attempt to fill the current lacuna in Islamic literature by addressing some aspects of the ethical management of incidental findings from an Islamic perspective. The study is divided into three main chapters. The first chapter offers an overview of recent genomic initiatives in the Gulf region, with special reference to initiatives by two nations: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. After this first-hand information about these primary initiatives in the Gulf region, the second chapter broadens the scope by reviewing international deliberations on the ethical management of incidental findings. By including these two chapters, we want to emphasize that Islamic bioethics should be interdisciplinary in nature, and informed as well by deliberations and discussions beyond the Islamic tradition. We hope that this interdisciplinary character will become more evident and better integrated in follow-up studies. The third chapter is dedicated to the core purpose of this study, namely delineating Islamic bioethical discussions related to incidental findings. To make the study accessible for non-specialists in Islamic studies, introductory notes are included about the field of Islamic bioethics.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
In much the same way that genomic technologies are changing the landscape of biomedical research, the ethical issues these technologies generate are setting today’s agenda of ethics research. The distinct ethical issues concerning the management of incidental findings represent a serious challenge that has occupied the minds of Western bioethicists for a while, but has yet to capture due attention from specialists in the Muslim world. Incidental findings are generally defined as results that arise although they were not part of the original purpose of the research project or clinical test. Ethical management of these findings is not a simple matter, because while they can be lifesaving, they can also lead to harmful consequences for the individual and community at large, and at other times lack any clear significance. This study is an attempt to fill the current lacuna in Islamic literature by addressing some aspects of the ethical management of incidental findings from an Islamic perspective. The study is divided into three main chapters. The first chapter offers an overview of recent genomic initiatives in the Gulf region, with special reference to initiatives by two nations: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. After this first-hand information about these primary initiatives in the Gulf region, the second chapter broadens the scope by reviewing international deliberations on the ethical management of incidental findings. By including these two chapters, we want to emphasize that Islamic bioethics should be interdisciplinary in nature, and informed as well by deliberations and discussions beyond the Islamic tradition. We hope that this interdisciplinary character will become more evident and better integrated in follow-up studies. The third chapter is dedicated to the core purpose of this study, namely delineating Islamic bioethical discussions related to incidental findings. To make the study accessible for non-specialists in Islamic studies, introductory notes are included about the field of Islamic bioethics.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.