document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne.https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche.
ABSTRACTRespect for privacy and intimacy is currently a right recognized for users of health and social services by codes of ethics, charters and laws. However, the meaning of this right remains uncertain. There's not only one meaning, but several meanings. Based on detailed observations in two clinical ethics committees located in health facilities and social services centers (centres de santé et de services sociaux), the authors present and analyze a number of contentious issues, in which an interpretation of the right to privacy and intimacy has been made. In regard to the analysed situations, it is concluded that the discussions held in the CEC lead to different modalities ("displacement and ranking", "opposition and avoidance", "openness and compromise", "enlargement and questioning") which modify the way that the user is perceived and the comprehensibility of his viewpoint. Furthermore, if the right for privacy and intimacy alter the way we see the user or a situation, it is subject to interpretation..