Yes, it makes a difference who hired the person responsible for a blood draw. It matters because the person must understand the importance of best practices while drawing blood. The person drawing the blood must be adequately trained to reduce the risk of endangering the health of the patient. Drawing blood from a person is critical; hence the need for quality assurance through best practices to prevent and control infections (WHO 4). The person drawing blood should have adequate education and training. The person should have sufficient knowledge of anatomy, be aware of risks from blood exposure and consequences of poor infection prevention and control. The person drawing the blood, therefore, needs to be careful and avoid contamination of the blood.
It would also be different because a qualified person would seek the couple and provide HIV/AIDS counseling. The husband and wife would have known about their status before the insurance company declined their offers. A certified person will be concerned with the couple’s health; hence they would make the couple aware of their situation and provide adequate information on how they could prevent the development of HIV into aids. The person drawing blood will not be concerned with only providing information for the insurance company to make the decision but also the well being of the couple. It would make a difference who hired the person responsible for a blood draw because different people understand the standards of healthcare (SMAIF 1). If the person were a health worker, they would not disclose the HIV status of the couple to so many people including the insurance company or the physician without first informing the husband and wife. A healthcare employee would understand the importance of privacy and health information confidentiality. This would be different because the person drawing blood understands that they are not required to share the HIV status of individuals including insurance companies. The person drawing blood is only needed to share the results of the test with only U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC 1) without including the name and other personal information. Insurance companies are not allowed to order a test for the HIV status of an individual when offering their services.
On the other hand, the results would not be different when a different person was ordered to draw blood. The couple did not contact their physician even when they were declined life insurance. They only reached the physician after two years when the wife was diagnosed with aids. The couple was negligent of their health status, and if they were concerned, they would have contacted the physician hence seek medical attention and prevent negative impacts (SMAIF 1). It would not be different because the insurance company clearly outlined the procedure for the couple to get the results. The husband and wife ignored the results until the wife was diagnosed with aids. It is the responsibility of the wife and husband to find out about their HIV status and not expect the insurance company to inform them. Both medical and nonmedical personnel can draw blood; hence there would be no difference in the results. The results would no be different because the duty of the laboratory was to inform the insurance company whose decision to cover the life of the husband and wife depended on the results. The insurance company did not have the family physicians address to release the test results.
SMAIF. “HIV Disclosure Policies and Procedures.” (n.d.). <https://www.hiv.gov/hiv-basics/living-well-with-hiv/your-legal-rights/limits-on-confidentiality>.
WHO. “WHO guidelines on drawing blood: best practices in phlebotomy.” (2010): 1- 125. <http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/268790/WHO-guidelines-on-drawing-blood-best-practices-in-phlebotomy-Eng.pdf?ua-1>.