Fab 4: Olivia Hasting, Renee Slaton, Maxine Jones, Sandy Sandoval

The CDC is suggesting that an opt-out agreement be generated that would take the approach of giving a patient the option of opting out of testing as well as opting out of giving an affirmative agreement for HIV testing. This approach would allow the CDC to test any individual that did not choose to opt-out of testing without having to explain the consequences of testing or having any affirmative agreement signed. With this approach the CDC would have more testing for HIV. The patient would not knowingly give his or her consent to be tested based on an opt-out option. The ethical dilemma is that the patient is being tricked into allowing the CDC to test them for HIV for the purpose of fighting HIV in the community. A GAP would be that the CDC does not specifically state what and where the results of testing would be used for.

The concern is that the CDC wants to test as many people as possible. Cost of testing may be low because without affirmative agreement.

This article is a peer reviewed article that discusses: Why the CDCs HIV Screening Recommendations May Violate the Least Infringement Principle. The gap in the beginning does not explain the Least Infringement Principle. We know that Infringement means to violate so we can assume that the definition of the Least Infringement Principle would be an infringement of ones personal rights. Another gap would be that this article assumes the reader knows the definition of HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus). CDC also stands for Center for Disease Control.