Dr Matthew C. Bobel joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Dr Robert K. Cleary: “How Should Risk Be Communicated to Patients When Developing Resident Surgeon Robotic Skills?”
Specific advocate guidelines are needed for the protection of children in state custody who are potential research subjects in trials that would expose them to greater-than-minimal risk but also hold the prospect of direct benefit.
An explanation of the legal origin of informed consent, the key court decisions in establishing the principle of consent to treatment, and the knowledge of risks and benefits necessary to “inform” the consent process adequately.
Argument that physicians called upon for expert testimony in court have an ethical duty to educate the jury by offering opinions based upon published, clinically based evidence and peer-reviewed medical literature.
An overview of the duties of expert medical witnesses and general medical witnesses in helping the judicial system gather objective information in cases of injury that may result from medical impairment.
The ongoing anthrax vaccination case, Doe v Rumsfeld, tests whether the military can require participation in and punish refusal of a vaccination program while waiving informed consent.
Admissible expert scientific testimony in federal courts is now judged by the less rigid Federal Rules of Evidence standard, which allows for the use of clinical material that is proven to be sound in methodology.