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.
Using the patient’s worldview to challenge his or her decision and establish a treatment plan—implying the view is shared by the physician when it is not—could be seen as manipulative and deceptive.
Caregivers often think that so-called “frequent-flyer” patients are at fault for their poor medical outcomes. In many such cases, though, unaddressed psychosocial issues are the root of the patients’ repeat visits to the emergency department.
Dr Esha Bansal joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Drs Saran Kunaprayoon and Linda P. Zhang: “Opportunities for Global Health Diplomacy in Transnational Robotic Telesurgery.”