Gene editing reminds professionals and the public that this technology’s reach goes beyond treating somatic disease to germline consequences yet unknown.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1056-1058. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1056.
International debate about human genome editing governance has undergone a paradigm shift and suggests that inclusive public deliberation is still important.
AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(12):E1065-1070. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2019.1065.
Medical students’ moral distress about end-of-life cases can be reduced through ethics consultation and ethics rounds, narrative reflection, and mentoring.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(6):585-594. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.6.stas1-1706.
The convening power of clinical ethics committees stems from their reputation for fairness and procedural legitimacy in addressing and resolving ethically complex cases.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(5):540-545. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.5.msoc2-1605.
The DSM-5 Task Force’s handling of the ethical controversy over the bereavement exclusion demonstrates the need for more inclusive deliberative processes.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(2):192-198. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.2.pfor2-1702.
When patients are unable to express their wishes and do not have surrogates or advance directives, which and whose values should inform decision making for them? We discuss ethical complexities of caring for unrepresented patients.
Women who are pregnant might not treat their mental illnesses because they overestimate risks of medication and underestimate risks of leaving their illness untreated.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(6):614-623. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.6.stas1-1606.
John is one patient-sitter whose cancer and portraiture experiences illuminate what it means to witness, to express regard for another’s difficult health and health care experiences.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(6):E470-475. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.470.