State laws prohibiting sodomy were on the books throughout US history until struck down by the US Supreme Court, which argued in Lawrence v Texas (2003) that the state cannot criminalize private sexual conduct.
When a patient requests an unfamiliar treatment, the physician should not hesitate to research it before giving a categorical reply about its safety or efficacy.
The revisions balance a growing understanding of gender identity disorders and societal views with the need to retain conditions that benefit from intervention and the removal of which would hamper patients’ ability to receive medical treatment.
Patricia D. Quigley, MD and Megan A. Moreno, MD, MSEd, MPH
Maintaining an adolescent’s confidentiality while answering his or her parents’ questions about their child’s change in mood and behavior can be challenging.
Loss of personal integrity, the emotional and psychological costs of “pronoun switching,” and actively managing one’s presentation can be time-consuming and exhausting.
“Difficult” patient encounters can be exacerbated by procedural and technological infrastructure that increases access to electronic health records (EHRs).
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(4):374-380. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.4.stas1-1704.
The profession of medicine is duty-bound to further the best interests of the public. If evidence suggests that discrimination based on sexual orientation or denial of civil marriage to GLBT couples has adverse effects on their health, physicians must oppose such practices, regardless of their personal biases.
While the Model State Public Health Act does much to address inconsistent and outdated state legislation pertaining to infectious disease outbreaks and other public health emergencies, its current form has caused some concern about possible infringement of civil liberties.
An argument that the concept of judicious dissent can resolve the debate over a physician’s conscience-based right to refuse to provide lawful services.
An argument that an individual physician’s conscience-based decision not to offer specific, lawful medical services should not restrict patients’ access to those services.