Biomedical Ethics As a Model for Environmental Risk Communication. T. W. Lambert and S. E. Hrudey, Eco-Research Chair in Environmental Risk Management, Environmental Health Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2G3
In the past 10-15 years, the right of the individual to know of the health risks one encounters in daily life in the community and the workplace has been defined in legislation. Risk communicators play a central role in facilitating the public's "right to know". In some cases, the obligations for risk communication may appear to be defined by the requirements of the "right to know" legislation. This presentation explores the meaning of risk communication in the context of "right to know" by exploring the applicability to risk communication of the ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, and non-malificence, as developed in the field of biomedical ethics. The ethical dilemma faced by risk communicators is to cause enough alarm to promote appropriate protective or preventive behavior by individuals while not creating unwarranted anxiety. We argue that risk messages should be designed
to foster public autonomy but they must also honor the principles of beneficence and non-malificence. Successful risk communication has been found to depend on the public's trust in risk communicators and risk messages. Adoption of an ethical framework that engenders trust will increase the effectiveness of risk communication. A model for the fiduciary relationship between risk communicator and the public is developed from our analysis of physician-patient relationship models described in the medical ethics literature. We argue that the "reasonable person" standard of disclosure offers an appropriate ethical framework for developing risk messages.