Ethics & Law · patient case question
If the dentist had instead told this patient he 'needed' veneers to protect his teeth, which ethical principle would be violated?
Patient case: A Teenager, His Mother, and a Language Barrier
Patient: 14-year-old male, accompanied by his mother
Chief Complaint: “I don't like how my teeth look. I want veneers.”
Background: Orthodontic treatment completed six months ago. His mother speaks only Spanish and the dentist speaks only English. The mother has brought her 16-year-old nephew along, offering to have him interpret.
Medications: None
Vital Signs: BP 108/66 mmHg · HR 76 bpm · RR 16 · T 98.4°F
Findings: Class I occlusion with an excellent post-orthodontic result. Teeth are well aligned, intact, unrestored and caries-free. Shade and morphology are within normal limits. No wear, no discoloration.
Show answer and explanation
Correct answer: C. Veracity
- A. Autonomy is undermined as a CONSEQUENCE — a patient deceived cannot consent freely — but the act itself is a lie, and veracity is the principle that governs lying.
- B. Beneficence is the duty to act for the patient's benefit. It is offended here, but only downstream of the untruth.
- C. CORRECT. VERACITY is the duty of truthfulness. Telling a patient that elective cosmetic treatment on sound teeth is clinically necessary is a false statement made to induce acceptance of treatment — the direct breach is truthfulness. In the ADA Principles of Ethics it appears as the section on Veracity: the dentist shall not represent care in a false or misleading manner.
- D. Justice concerns the fair distribution of care and resources, and treating people equitably regardless of who they are. It is not the principle at stake in a misrepresentation.
Note: Related pairings that recur on this exam: non-maleficence → informing a patient of an exposure incident or an error; beneficence → using skills for community health; justice → equitable access and non-discrimination; autonomy → informed consent, confidentiality and the right to refuse.