The clinician/healer must both address the disease and seek to know how the medical condition is being experienced by the patient—what impact it has on his or her life and spirit.
Public and private choices about allocation of funds for research raise a social-justice question: are these funding sources making fair decisions about where to invest their resources? The NIH has the clearest obligation to do so because it is taxpayer-supported.
The question that comes to mind when one considers the risks of a clinical trial is, “Why would anyone agree to participate?” Interviews with trial volunteers and their family members make clear that often it is the appeal of discovering something new and unknown.
Physicians new to a case might object to an established care plan. Practice variation, clinical momentum, and how value is assigned by different parties to acute care and comfort measures can each contribute to conflict in these cases.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(8):E699-707. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.699.
Clara C. Hildebrandt, MD and Jonathan M. Marron, MD, MPH
Gene editing with CRISPR/Cas9 raises concerns about equitable access to therapies that could limit research participation by minority group members. These concerns can be addressed through public education, transparency, and stakeholder partnerships.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E826-833. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.826.
Jonathan Treem, MD, Joel Yager, MD, and Jennifer L. Gaudiani, MD, CEDS-S
Some individuals with severe and enduring anorexia nervosa experience dramatically degraded quality of life in the face of refractory illness and compulsory treatment.
AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(9):E703-709. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2023.703.