According to IRS ruling, as issued under SEC. 7216.gob (also see T.D. 9608), the client’s personal information should only be used in any manner after having the client or any other related individual as indicated by the customer sign a consent form which authorizes the use of such information. The law of ethics requires any person within his/her capacity to ensure that confidentiality of the client information is observed to the later. Adhering to client’s confidentiality principle through having the clients sign a consent form before using any of their information is very paramount as it enhances the much-needed trust especially in the institutions where clients’ most sensitive data is used such as in the hospitals ( Klinefelter, 2012).
A consent form is signed by customers for two specific reasons. Firstly it is an assurance that the client's information is going to be used for goodwill of the either the public or the clients him/herself. The second reason is to ascertain that the client admitted and entirely understood the need of their confidential information and therefore accept that they are well placed for the reasons given.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In the case of Jones, he has breached an ethical principle of confidentiality. First, he compiles the list of taxpayers using specific client’s information without consenting any of them. This is a serious course of concern since; he ought to have alerted the clients before using their confidential information. He should not have ignored the power of consent since he has been on the job for twenty years and he must not claim he was not aware of the ethical principles that must be put into consideration when using customer’s information.
Secondly, Jones’ intent to allow other institutions to use the client information without their consents is ethically non-acceptable. He should understand the consequences of improper usage of the customer’s information. He should know that the client information is valuable to them and should not be carelessly shared. With the experience on his papers, he should have good background knowledge about ethics. For this reason, he acts ignorantly hence deserves fine as asserted by Boumil (2011).
Opinion
In my perspective, confidentiality and the issue of consent are matter of great importance. For instance, many people have forced patient in the hospital to undergo treatment against their wishes. When such cases are followed, the result always indicates that the patient did not consent. Moreover, it is not once or twice we have heard such cases filed in a law court, where an ignorant social worker uses the client information or give it to some who later uses it in crime scenes or for bad intention, such case und up with the employee facing turf consequences.
Jones’ case is a reflection of what happens in the society. Most companies use client’s personal information unethically to seek solace from other clients or out-compete their opponents in the market. Others use client’s data to track down their client’s movement for instance shopping and many others. This is unethical and should be appropriately punished in the court of law. Jones has enough experience to know that the existence of an ethical principle which guards the patient information and restricts its use carelessly or sharing the client’s information. Also, his twenty years’ experience is enough for him to know that before one use a client data, that client has to be contacted and given a consent form to sign to ascertain that the data is to be utilized for the proper reason of both the client and the public at large. For this reason, he acts out of ignorance which as we know is not a defensive mechanism in the court of law. Therefore, he deserves the fine to serve as a reminder to whoever might be thinking along his line.
References
Boumil, M. M., Freitas, C. F., & Freitas, D. F. (2011). Legal and Ethical Issue Confronting Guardian ad Litem Practice. JL & Fam. Stud. , 13 , 43.
Klinefelter, A. (2012). When to Research is to reveal: The Growing Threat to Attorney and Client Confidentiality from Online Tracking. Virginia Journal of Law and Technology: North Carolina.
