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 advent of force-feeding in the new century in the context of conflict and protest made it necessary to clarify and revise the whole concept of artificial feeding and force-feeding.
As a matter of medical ethics, physicians must advocate for their vulnerable patients and medical schools should offer training in advocacy and activism.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(1):8-15. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.1.ecas1-1701.
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.
Giving undocumented immigrants and those with DACA status (DREAMers) access to health care and medical education enables them to contribute to these systems.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(3):221-233. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.3.peer1-1703.
Joel A. DeLisa, MD, MS and Jacob Jay Lindenthal, PhD, DrPH
Research on experiences of practicing physicians who have disabilities could help medical schools counsel applicants and increase enrollment among students with disabilities. This can ultimately improve care for patients with disabilities.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(10):1003-1009. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.10.stas1-1610.