Raphael P. Viscidi, MD and Keerti V. Shah, MD, DrPH
The arguments for mandatory vaccination with human papillomavirus vaccine differs from the justification for mandatory use of vaccines that protect against more easily transmitted diseases.
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.
The ongoing anthrax vaccination case, Doe v Rumsfeld, tests whether the military can require participation in and punish refusal of a vaccination program while waiving informed consent.
A review of the case of a physician accused of euthanizing four patients following Hurricane Katrina and the state attorney's unethical conduct in releasing information to the media.
A physician should protect the best interest of the patient and the patient's family in the event that an end-of-life case gains media attention and the treating physician and nontreating physicians are asked to comment.
A physician should protect the best interest of the patient and the patient's family in the event that an end-of-life case gains media attention and the treating physician and nontreating physicians are asked to comment.
Physicians can ethically withhold information in situations where full disclosure of a diagnosis or treatment would cause great psychological harm to the patient.