Case Study: Legal and Ethical Implication of a Public Health Approach to Disability
Q1 Should MedCentre screen all employees, or should it "target" or limit screening to employees whose jobs involve regular contact with hospital patients and employees, as Paula Smith suggested? Assuming that certain jobs are less likely to transmit infection via interpersonal contact, will general screening be perceived as paternalistic?
Q2 Should MedCentre obtain employees' consent to the screening? If so, how can MedCentre ensure that the employees are sufficiently Informed?
Q3 How should MedCentre document and store the records of screening results?
Q4 How should MedCentre notify employees of their serological status? Should or must MedCentre provide counseling?
Q5 What "reasonable accommodations" can or should MedCentre make for seropositive individuals? Is vaccination legally, ethically, or economically feasible?
Q6 What preventative procedures and/or programs can MedCentre implement to ensure that seropositive individuals are not discriminated against on the basis of their serological status?