A woman with breast cancer is found to carry a mutation that predisposed her to her condition. Her two sisters and brother may also carry the mutation. Informing them of this would allow them to consider screening and perhaps take steps to prevent the onset of the disease or the passing of the mutation to their unborn children. Not informing them could mean the sisters will also develop breast cancer, as might the eventual daughter of the patient's brother. The patient is at liberty to tell her siblings that they might want to think about screening, but her doctors are not. Patient confidentiality laws prevent them. But is this morally right? Does the breaking of confidentiality outweigh the good that could be done by doctors informing the patient's relatives? Is it time to change patient confidentiality laws? The findings of a group of researchers have led its members to suggest that it is.