Final answer:
Practitioners may only disclose information without consent in specific situations as permitted by law, such as when required by court orders, for public health purposes, to prevent serious harm, or when legal mandates demand reporting, such as in the case of communicable diseases.
Step-by-step explanation:
Practitioners can disclose information without consent in D) specific situations as permitted by law. It is generally required for practitioners to protect the privacy and confidentiality of their clients or research participants. However, there are exceptions where disclosure without consent is legally permitted, such as in cases where the disclosure is necessary to prevent a serious threat to an individual's life or health, during legal proceedings when a court order demands it, or for public health reasons. Other examples include situations in which the information pertains to children's welfare or is part of a legal investigation.
For instance, a medical application of this might be where the law mandates reporting certain communicable diseases to public health authorities. In the context of research, informed consent is crucial, but there might be exceptions, such as research involving public datasets where individual consent is not feasible or using archival data where participants are de-identified.
In the domain of government and public interest, certain information could be an exception to the Freedom of Information Act, such as medical records for government employees. Additionally, the necessity to balance individual rights with public safety or the collective good could lead to legally sanctioned breaches of confidentiality or privacy under specific and regulated circumstances.