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.
Clinical case examines physicians’ duties and risks during an epidemic. Commentaries address physician’s rights vs patients’ rights. Does the duty to treat always override personal or family concerns?
Clinical case examines physicians’ duties and risks during an epidemic. Commentaries address physician’s rights vs patients’ rights. Does the duty to treat always override personal or family concerns?
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.
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?”