ChatterBank0 min ago
Whistleblowing Midwife & Human Rights
http://
An interesting case from a human rights perspective, although there is obviously far more to it than that given possible other "allegations" referred to.
So, when offsetting human rights, how do people think it should be decided whose "rights" take precedence, especially in a case like this and who do you think should make those decisions?
An interesting case from a human rights perspective, although there is obviously far more to it than that given possible other "allegations" referred to.
So, when offsetting human rights, how do people think it should be decided whose "rights" take precedence, especially in a case like this and who do you think should make those decisions?
Answers
Only 1 answer
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Eve. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Not sure - they're foster parents and not adoptive parents, and it's the mothers diagnosis and not actually the babys. I wonder how likely it is to contact HIV from messy nappies, or nips and cuts. Tricky choice I guess-However we have had babies in my clinic to be followed up for HIV and other blood born virus testing because they've been taken from the care of their mothr who may have tested postive for any of these things and foster parents have brought them. I've no idea whether they know the mothers status but clearly they're aware that the baby might have been at risk so needs to be tested.
Only 1 answer
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.