Overturning this case’s precedent might result in clinicians claiming more religious exemptions and increased risk of harm to patients.

Drs Michael Young, Robert Regenhardt, and Leonard Sokol join Ethics Talk to discuss their article, coauthored with Dr Thabele Leslie-Mazwi: "When Should Neuroendovascular Care for Patients With Acute Stroke Be Palliative?"

Lack of ethical, legal, and clinical consensus about best practice sometimes combines with a poor clinical evidence base.

For many physicians, lack of understanding about brain death leads to confusion and muddles interactions with patients’ loved ones at the end of life.

Since 1995, the American Academy of Neurology has provided guidelines for brain death determination, but nationwide adherence to these guidelines has been incomplete.

Lobbying, maintaining diagnostic skill, participating in national societies, and contributing to robust discourse can influence practice and policy.

Criteria in statutes and tests used to diagnose brain death don’t always jibe, and this can undermine public trust in death pronouncements.

Dr Ariane Lewis discusses how we can navigate uncertainty and ambiguity about brain death by understanding clinical criteria for brain death determination and how our approaches to death are culturally and socially situated.

Countering the prevailing thought that more medical testing and treatment is always better can be achieved by creating a forum for open discussion of costs and value to prevent patient harm from overuse.

Dr Jake Greenblum joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Dr Ryan Hubbard: “Should Employment Division v Smith Be Overturned?”