Researchers and clinicians face ethical and policy-based challenges in disclosing, preventing and treating psychosis. Which diagnostic labels should be considered to motivate more effective public and professional dialogue about psychosis risk?
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(6):624-632. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.6.msoc1-1606.
The AAP’s guidelines on lipid screening for children raise concerns about the fundamental purpose of prevention and its role in balancing individual autonomy with the benefits of society at large.
Given the well-established correlation across cultures between poverty and unhealthy lifestyles, can it be just to hold individuals responsible for choices typical of their socioeconomic sector? Aren’t patient-responsibility programs simply conspiracies to shrink benefits to the poor?
Joel A. DeLisa, MD, MS and Jacob Jay Lindenthal, PhD, DrPH
Research on experiences of practicing physicians who have disabilities could help medical schools counsel applicants and increase enrollment among students with disabilities. This can ultimately improve care for patients with disabilities.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(10):1003-1009. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.10.stas1-1610.
Defining typical appearance as a goal of health service provision is harmful and unnecessary for traits that are stigmatized but neither harmful nor distressing.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(7):E569-575. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.569.
Charles E. Binkley, MD, Michael S. Politz, MA, and Brian P. Green, PhD
If the safe-and-effective standard for judging devices’ potential as therapy or enhancement is inadequate, one might wonder whether BCI regulation should be overseen by the FDA.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(9):E745-749. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.745.
Dr Charles Binkley joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Michael Politz and Dr Brian Green: "Who, If Not the FDA, Should Regulate Implantable Brain-Computer Interface Devices?"