| Course | HCA 415 Healthcare Ethics |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Truth-telling paper |
| Length | About 1,027 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Health Care Administration |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HCA 415 Module 6
Telling the Truth, Keeping Confidences: Two Cases and the Limits of Each
Student Name
Health Care Administration Program, Aspen University
HCA 415: Healthcare Ethics
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Telling the Truth, Keeping Confidences: Two Cases and the Limits of Each
Truth-telling and confidentiality are foundations of trust in health care. Patients need honest information to make choices, and they share private information because they trust it will be protected. Yet both duties have limits and hard cases. This paper examines two composite cases involving truth-telling, then considers when confidentiality must yield.
Case One: Do Not Tell Him
Mr. L., 78, recently immigrated to join his daughter's family. A biopsy shows stomach cancer. Before the results visit, his daughter calls the clinic and asks that her father not be told the diagnosis, explaining that in their culture families protect elders from bad news and that knowing would make him lose hope.
Why Truth-Telling Matters
Respect for autonomy generally requires that patients receive information needed to make decisions about their care (Beauchamp & Childress, 2019). Withholding a diagnosis can prevent a patient from choosing treatment, putting affairs in order or saying goodbyes. At the same time, respect for persons includes respect for their preferences about how information is shared.
Resolving Case One
The clinician did not simply follow either the daughter's request or a rule of full disclosure. She asked Mr. L., with a professional interpreter, how he wanted to receive information about his health: Some people want to know everything; others prefer that family handle details. Mr. L. said his daughter handles such matters and he would like her to decide. That choice, made by him, honored his autonomy while respecting his cultural preference. The clinician confirmed he could ask questions at any time.
Therapeutic Privilege
Clinicians sometimes invoke therapeutic privilege, the claim that telling would itself seriously harm the patient, but the exception is narrow and seldom justified. Fear that a patient will lose hope is not usually enough. The clinician in Case One did not invoke it; she let Mr. L. decide how information would be handled.
Case Two: A Medication Error
Ms. D., 64, received twice her prescribed dose of a blood thinner because a pharmacy label error was not caught at the clinic's medication reconciliation. She developed a large bruise and a nosebleed that required an emergency visit. She recovered. The clinic must decide what to tell her. Her daughter, who manages her medications, called to ask how it happened.
What Patients Want After Errors
Patients and physicians often differ about disclosure. In focus groups, patients said they wanted every harmful error disclosed, with an explanation of the cause, the plan for dealing with its effects, the steps to stop it recurring and an apology; physicians agreed errors should be disclosed but often chose their words carefully and avoided saying an error occurred or explaining why (Gallagher et al., 2003). The table contrasts the two.
| Patients want | Physicians often |
|---|---|
| Explicit statement that an error occurred | Describe an adverse event without calling it an error |
| Explanation of why | Avoid explaining causes |
| How it will be prevented | Omit prevention steps |
| Apology | Express regret without apology |
Resolving Case Two
The clinic's physician and office manager met with Ms. D. They stated plainly that an error in checking her medication caused her to receive a double dose, apologized, explained how the error happened, described the new double-check step added to reconciliation and offered to cover the emergency visit costs. Ms. D. said the honesty mattered more than anything else.
Confidentiality and Its Limits
Confidentiality protects patients' private information, but it is not absolute. If a patient seriously threatens a specific, identifiable person, California's highest court required therapists to take reasonable steps to protect the person at risk (Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 1976), and many states have adopted versions of this duty. Laws also require reporting of abuse and certain diseases.
A Confidentiality Scenario
In a behavioral health visit at the same clinic, a patient angrily said he would hurt his former partner, naming her and describing a plan. The clinician assessed the threat as serious, followed the clinic's protocol under state law and notified police and the named person, documenting her reasoning. She told the patient what she had done and continued to offer care.
Principles Across the Cases
Across the cases, the same principles appear. Autonomy requires honest information, delivered in the way the patient prefers. Beneficence and nonmaleficence require disclosure of errors and protection of third parties from serious harm. Justice requires that patients from every culture receive the same respect and the same information.
Institutional Support
Organizations support truth-telling and confidentiality through professional interpreters, disclosure policies and training, clear protocols for threats and mandatory reporting, and a culture in which staff can report errors without fear. Administrators should review disclosures and near misses to learn from them.
Counterargument
Some argue that full disclosure of errors invites lawsuits. Yet disclosure is ethically required, patients want it, and communication-and-resolution approaches aim to address harm fairly. Hiding errors damages trust and, if discovered, is far worse for patients and institutions.
Interpreters and Honesty
Truth-telling depends on communication. Using a professional interpreter in Case One ensured that Mr. L. heard the clinician's question accurately and that his answer was his own, not filtered through his daughter. Family members as interpreters may soften or omit information, even with good intentions.
Learning From Errors
After disclosing the error to Ms. D., the clinic reviewed how the label error was missed and added a second check for high-risk medicines at reconciliation. Disclosure and learning are linked: an organization that hides errors cannot fix them.
Confidentiality With Family
Families often want information about adult patients. Unless the patient agrees, clinicians should share only what the law allows. In Case One, Mr. L.'s choice to let his daughter handle details gave clear permission; without it, the clinic would have needed his consent before discussing results with her.
Conclusion
Truth-telling and confidentiality protect trust. In Mr. L.'s case, asking how he wanted information handled honored both autonomy and culture. In Ms. D.'s case, full disclosure with apology and prevention met what patients want. Confidentiality yields when a patient seriously threatens another person, as the law recognizes. Institutions make these duties workable through interpreters, policies and a culture of honesty.
References
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gallagher, T. H., Waterman, A. D., Ebers, A. G., Fraser, V. J., & Levinson, W. (2003). Patients' and physicians' attitudes regarding the disclosure of medical errors. JAMA, 289(8), 1001-1007. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.8.1001
Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 17 Cal. 3d 425 (1976).
What the HCA 415 Module 6 instructions ask for
Truth-telling and confidentiality are central themes in HCA 415's study of ethical perspectives, and with the module's own prompt held for enrolled students, two cases on these duties were built for this example. Assignments here often ask how to handle requests to withhold information, how to disclose errors and when confidentiality may be broken. See whether the prompt wants truth-telling, confidentiality or both. Use cases to show how principles apply. Cite evidence on what patients want after errors. Include the legal limits of confidentiality, since graders look for awareness that duties are not absolute. Pair each case with a clear resolution. Cite evidence on disclosure.
How this HCA 415 Module 6 example is built
Eighteen headings and a four-row disclosure table carry roughly 1,030 words. It presents Case One, explains why truth-telling matters and resolves the case, then covers therapeutic privilege. Case Two, what patients want after errors, and its resolution follow. Confidentiality and its limits, a threat scenario, principles across cases, institutional support and a counterargument come next. Interpreters and honesty, learning from errors and confidentiality with family close the body. A note beside the Case One resolution explains how asking the patient resolves the conflict. Each case follows the same steps: situation, principles, resolution. That parallel structure lets the reader compare how truth-telling works in two very different settings. The threat scenario shows the duty to protect in practice.
HCA 415 Module 6 rubric: what earns full marks
Truth-telling papers tend to be graded on balanced reasoning, use of evidence, attention to culture and awareness of legal limits. Reasoning respects both autonomy and cultural preference. Evidence on patients' and physicians' views after errors is cited in APA style, along with an ethics text and the duty-to-protect case. Culture is handled by asking the patient, not assuming. Legal limits are stated clearly. Graders also reward practical supports such as interpreters and disclosure policies. Attention to interpreters shows awareness of how communication itself shapes truth-telling. The learning-from-errors section links honesty to organizational improvement, which administrators will value. Clear resolutions make each case useful. Concrete resolutions make the principles usable.
Common HCA 415 Module 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Students often choose either strict disclosure or deference to family without asking the patient. Ask the patient. Another common gap is vague error disclosure. Include what happened, why, prevention and apology. Some papers also treat confidentiality as absolute. Name its limits. A tutor can check whether each case resolution respects both the patient's rights and the relevant limits. Explain how the organization learned from the error, since disclosure without prevention is incomplete. Include family confidentiality rules, which often come up in practice, and bring in a trained interpreter whenever a patient's English is limited. Show how the patient was informed. Keep each case brief and clear. Show the apology in words.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HCA 415 and Health Care Administration sample papers
- HCA 415 Module 1: Critical Thinking Tools for Ethics
- HCA 415 Module 2: Major Moral Theories Compared
- HCA 415 Module 3: Autonomy, Consent and Capacity
- HCA 415 Module 4: Justice and Scarce Resources
- HCA 415 Module 5: End-of-Life Decisions
- HCA 415 Module 7: Organizational Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
- HCA 415 Module 8: Defending a Position With Counterarguments
- HCA 205 Module 5: Common Digestive Diseases
- HCA 315 Module 5: Workplace Law in a Health Care Setting
- HCA 405 Module 2: Office Environment, Safety and Supplies
- HCA 105 Module 6: A Medication Error Scenario
HCA 415 Module 6 questions, answered
What does HCA 415 Module 6 usually ask for?
Aspen's HCA 415 course applies critical thinking to ethics readings, and truth-telling and confidentiality are central themes, so a case-based paper is typical. Check your classroom prompt.
What is therapeutic privilege?
A narrow exception allowing clinicians to withhold information when disclosure itself would cause serious harm; fear of lost hope is rarely enough.
What do patients want after a medical error?
An explicit statement that an error occurred, why it happened, how it will be prevented and an apology.
Where can I find a free HCA 415 Module 6 sample paper?
The truth-telling and confidentiality paper, both cases and the disclosure table, is on this page. It is the sixth HCA 415 sample.
Should a clinician follow a family's request to withhold a diagnosis in HCA 415 Module 6?
Not automatically; the clinician should ask the patient how they want information handled and follow the patient's choice.