Nonlegal, judicial, and statutory courses of action are available to patient surrogates and physicians who cannot agree on withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment.
When evaluating the developments and complications of a marginally viable premature infant, physicians and parents must work together to decide on treatment that is in the infant’s best interest.
Industry sponsorship of continuing medical education is controversial. A standard to adhere to is that before accepting any industry-sponsored education or incentive, a physician should form an independent evaluation of the product.
A physicians urges practitioners to use cost-effective alternatives to dispensing samples to patients who cannot afford to pay for their prescriptions.
Stanford University Medical School established a positive partnership with a pharmaceutical company to offer an industry-sponsored resident elective course in a way that minimizes conflict of interest and has been accepted by the ACGME.
A physician argues that pharmaceutical industry support for residency programs creates a conflict of interest and compromises the educational integrity of the programs.
Physicians should be aware of the level of emotional distress and suffering that a patient is experiencing as a result of his or her illness and incorporate that into the patient's treatment plan.
Argument that physicians called upon for expert testimony in court have an ethical duty to educate the jury by offering opinions based upon published, clinically based evidence and peer-reviewed medical literature.
Physicians do not have to give therapies or perform procedures that they judge to be futile and Catholic patients have the moral right to determine what is extraordinary or ordinary care.