Physicians have an obligation to consider a patient’s quality of life when making treatment decisions and should consider giving patients the options of withholding or withdrawing aggressive treatment if that treatment will not restore the kind of life the patient finds meaningful.
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.
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.
Physicians who treat children with Down's syndrome should ensure that their parents fully understand the children's capabilities and long-term prognosis and counsel them on the appropriate actions to take regarding their children's care.
Dr Jeannie P. Cimiotti joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Drs Kimberly Adams Tufts, Lucia D. Wocial, and Elizabeth Peter: “How Should Focus Be Shifted From Individual Preference to Collective Wisdom for Patients at the End of Life With Antimicrobial-Resistant Infections?”
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.
Preventing bad outcomes for teens and their offspring was the impetus behind confidential care for reproductive health. Requiring parental involvement created an obstacle to the provision of necessary care.