Physicians, committees, and guardians all make decisions for unrepresented patients in the US. This article considers a “tiered” approach as an alternative.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(7):E587-593. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.587.
A review of a landmark case that determined why and under what circumstances antipsychotic medications can be administered to incarcerated patients with mental illness against their will.
Nonlegal, judicial, and statutory courses of action are available to patient surrogates and physicians who cannot agree on withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment.
A summary of the legal cases that have set precedence for the rights of physicians and surrogates when life-sustaining treatment is withdrawn from patients who cannot make the final decision for themselves.
Parents' ability to make medical decisions for their children can be limited by state law if it is determined that the child's best interest is not being met.
A landmark court case in California determined that a competent adult patient has the right to forgo medical treatment and the patient's autonomy supersedes the state's interest in preserving the patient's life.
By failing to follow informed consent protocols and regulations, a researcher engaging in CBPR may inflict permanent harm on the participating community and chill future research among disadvantaged populations.