Sriya Bhattacharyya, PhD, Aaron S. Breslow, PhD, Jianee Carrasco, and Benjamin Cook, PhD, MPH
Force is codified in law, so force utilization inequity demands that we consider connections between systemic oppression and individuals’ responses in clinical settings.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(4):E340-348. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.340.
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.
Kristen N. Pallok and David A. Ansell’s “Should Clinicians Be Activists?” highlights how physician activists risk retaliation from “economically and socially” privileged physician leaders and organizational leadership who “have been trained to comply” with structural inequity.
AMA J Ethics. 2022;24(7):E694-696. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2022.694.
With the U.S. Supreme Court likely to decide on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, it is instructive to understand the relevant policy positions of the largest physician organization in the country.
Extending immunosuppressive drug coverage for the lifetime of kidney patients, instead of only covering dialysis, would be a cost-effective way for the federal government to reduce the costs of posttransplant care while improving clinical outcomes for patients.