Should she tell the wife? Should someone??

I think those of us who aren't the three people involved might want to butt out.

As for the wife needing to be informed of the dangers of diseases, I get the feeling this isn't the first rodeo for this guy. She's gotta know, or be in incredibly deep denial.

But either way, it ain't our business, now, is it?

But *I* know. And she's mothering children with this guy. So if she gets some disease when I could have spoken up seems unethical. How are your ethics informing you to do nothing, please explain that to me?

There is a difference between knowing there is a disease and using the potential for a disease as an excuse to butt in.

I agree with Jespah. The wife already knows. I wouldn't get in the middle of this mess in a million years.

That is, unless you really want to be part of this sick game they are playing. If it gives you kicks, then by all means step right in.

Seems like your assurance she already knows is a worse guess than my gambit- taking a risk to inform her over a supposition is better than taking a risk by not informing. The ethics seem to still balance in favor of revealing. I'd still like someone to pose an actual ethical reason to not tell her.

The ethical reason is that the FACTS are unknown in order to make a good decision. (Since you have made this a medical concern)

Then, there is the "soft ethics" of not getting involved in others' relationship.

It is HIM you should be talking to.

(Is this a homework assignment for an ethics class?)

Seems like you have already decided that you are going to tell her, you simply want us to affirm that decision. Looks like you are out of luck in that regard.

Wrong guess. But your supposition leads you down a path of asocial behavior: accusing me of something which you did not know. I'm not even going that far in my possibilities- I would only state facts I knew to the wife. However, I hesitate due to the ethics involved.

So, to the contrary, again: I was requesting someone present an ethical argument for not informing the wife. If, as the person above says it is ethical not to tell because the FACTS are not known- that seems odd to me as ethical decisions aren't based on only facts, hardly ever in fact. That's why ethics partially exist- to be able to operate without complete facts in a way that promotes social benefits.

And many facts are known: he is cheating on her. Not using protection. Having anal sex. Blood exchange is involved. The only fact I don't know which causes me to hesitate at all is if they are both or one is HIV positive.

People on other boards, interestingly responded quite differently from the people here. It seems a lot depends on peoples' own contexts.

No it's not a homework assignment, it is real.

Interesting idea that it is HIM whom I should approach. Thanks for that insight to the poster above. I think that might even be a small piece to completing the entire dilemma for me.

I think I've found an alternate path to take that avoids the entire quandary, however, and still appears to me to be ethical. I'll know in about a week if this third path/choice is the one I can take.

Please do let us know.

Do you KNOW that your friend has diseases she is passing on to her occasional partner/s?

In the jurisdiction I live in you may have a responsibility to advise the local health authorities.

I think you'll find that the membership balance on this board is skewed older/more mature/more experienced than some other boards.

Is your friend a disease-carrier?

you are making an assumption

it could be strong or weak - still an assumption

is your friend a disease-carrier?

The ethical arguments against telling go like this:
- You have no first hand knowledge. You say "... many facts are known: he is cheating on her. Not using protection. Having anal sex. Blood exchange is involved." You only know that if you are the one engaging in such activities.
For all you know, your friend is a nutcase. To make such a serious accusation you should possess inarguable facts.
- There is a family and children involved here. You are not in a position to balance if potential damage of your revelation is outweighed by the benefits. The possibility of you doing far more damage with by telling should strongly motivate you to stay silent.