Physicians’ ethical obligation to ensure communities’ access to safe drinking water has roots in their expertise, social authority, and role as mediators.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(10):1027-1035. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.10.pfor1-1710.
Physician advocacy for climate change mitigation is justified by seven criteria including physicians’ efficacy, expertise, public trust, and proximity.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1202-1210. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.msoc1-1712.
Climate change mitigation reforms of government policy, medical curricula, and health professions organizations should be the focus of physician advocacy.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1222-1237. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.sect1-1712.
The adverse health effects of climate change should be the focus of physician advocacy efforts and of conversations between physicians and their patients.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1174-1182. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.ecas3-1712.
There are “push” factors such as poor working conditions, substandard facilities, unsafe conditions, and low income that discourage health professionals trained in Indian medical schools from staying in country.
Abraar Karan, MD, Daniel DeUgarte, MD, and Michele Barry, MD
Responsibility for physician “brain drain” can be attributed to the resource-poor countries that lose talent, the wealthy recruiting countries, and individuals.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(7):665-675. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.7.ecas1-1607.