Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Jul;32(7):398-402.
doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.012237.

Privacy and patient-clergy access: perspectives of patients admitted to hospital

Affiliations

Privacy and patient-clergy access: perspectives of patients admitted to hospital

E Erde et al. J Med Ethics. 2006 Jul.

Abstract

Background: For patients admitted to hospital both pastoral care and privacy or confidentiality are important. Rules related to each have come into conflict recently in the US. Federal laws and other rules protect confidentiality in ways that countermand hospitals' methods for facilitating access to pastoral care. This leads to conflicts and poses an unusual type of dilemma-one of conflicting values and rights. As interests are elements necessary for establishing rights, it is important to explore patients' interests in privacy compared with their desire for attention from a cleric.

Aim: To assess the willingness of patients to have their names and rooms included on a list by religion, having that information given to clergy without their consent, their sense of privacy violation if that were done and their views about patients' privacy rights.

Methods and participants: 179 patients, aged 18-92 years, admitted to hospital in an acute care setting, were interviewed and asked about their preferences for confidentiality and pastoral support.

Results: Most (57%) patients did not want to be listed by religion; 58% did not think hospitals should give lists to clergy without their consent and 84% welcomed a visit by their own clergy even if triggered from a hospital list.

Conclusions: Values related to confidentiality or privacy and pastoral care were found to be inconsistent and more complicated than expected. Balancing the right to privacy and the value of religious support continue to present a challenge for hospitals. Patients' preferences support the importance of providing balance in a way that protects rights while offering comprehensive services.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Baldwin W. The hospital chaplain's role‐strictly confidential. Nurs Mirror 198115326–28. - PubMed
    1. Thiel M M, Robinson M R. Physicians' collaboration with chaplains: difficulties and benefits. J Clin Ethics 1997894–103. - PubMed
    1. Mueller P S, Plevak D J, Rummans T A. Religious involvement, spirituality, and medicine: implications for clinical practice. Mayo Clin Proc 2001761225–1235. - PubMed
    1. Pargament K I, Koenig H G, Tarakeshwar N.et al Religious struggle as a predictor of mortality among medically‐ill elderly patients: a 2 year longitudinal study. Arch Intern Med 20011611881–1885. - PubMed
    1. Duenwald M. Religion and health:new research revives an old debate. New York Times 7 May 2002;Sect F5

Publication types