Final answer:
Practitioners who withhold information without a credible reason are violating the principle of nonmaleficence, which requires healthcare providers to act in ways that do not cause harm to others, By withholding information, practitioners may potentially harm patients by depriving them of crucial information for effective treatment.
Step-by-step explanation:
If practitioners withhold information or do not disseminate information for no credible reason, the practitioner is violating the principle of nonmaleficence. The principle of nonmaleficence requires that healthcare providers act in ways that do not cause harm to others. By withholding information without a credible reason, practitioners are potentially causing harm to patients by depriving them of crucial information that may be necessary for effective treatment.
For example, in the context of a sexually transmitted disease, if a practitioner withholds a patient's diagnosis from their sexual partners without a valid reason, they are violating the principle of nonmaleficence. By not informing the sexual partners, the practitioner is potentially putting them at risk of contracting the disease, which can cause harm.
It is important to note that the answer to the ethical dilemma of prioritizing the patient's privacy rights or the sexual partner's right to know depends on the specific circumstances and severity of the disease. However, the principle of nonmaleficence remains universal in healthcare ethics.