Streamlining US health care business has raised unique privacy concerns. Bills and explanations of benefits contain protected health information that could be disclosed to someone other than the patient.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(3):279-287. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.3.pfor4-1603.
Annette Hanson, MD, Ron Pies, MD, and Mark Komrad, MD
Authors respond to “How Should Physicians Care for Dying Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis?” by arguing that patients’ motives for accessing death with dignity laws should be thoroughly explored and that temporarily limiting patient autonomy can promote well-being at the end of life.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1107-1109. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1107.
Alexander Craig, MPhil and Elizabeth Dzeng, MD, PhD, MPH
Responding to “Added Points of Concern about Caring for Dying Patients,” authors argue that physicians’ refusal to prescribe lethal drugs in accordance with states’ death with dignity laws could damage patient-physician relationships and harm patients.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1110-1112. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1110.
False health information can harm, so hosts and writers of website content, clinicians, and patients are all responsible for jointly appraising the quality of online content and preventing the spread of misinformation.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1059-1066. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1059.
Upcoding and misrepresenting clinical information constitute fraud, cost a lot, and can result in patient harm and unnecessary procedures and prescriptions.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(3):E221-231. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.221.
Daphne C. Ferrer, MD and Peter M. Yellowlees, MBBS, MD
Telepsychiatry extends access to psychiatric treatment to those who might not otherwise get it, but licensure problems and the risk of boundary violations between patients and physicians need to be worked out.
The financial generosity of the pharmaceutical industry to provide funding for medical education tempts a compromise of professional standards and ethics.