Professional society guidelines can be used to set standards for clinical practice instead of government. This approach could help if federal or state policymakers view discarding embryos as ethically equivalent to abortion.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(12):E1160-1167. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1160.
The DSM-5 Task Force’s handling of the ethical controversy over the bereavement exclusion demonstrates the need for more inclusive deliberative processes.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(2):192-198. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.2.pfor2-1702.
Certificate of need programs need to be strengthened and updated to ensure consumers’ continuing access to care after hospital consolidations and mergers.
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(3):272-278. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.3.pfor3-1603.
Professor Katie Watson joins Ethics Talk to discuss what clinicians need to know about changes to the post-June 2022 legal, ethical, and clinical landscape of abortion care in the US.
Professor Michele Bratcher Goodwin joins Ethics Talk to consider how members of different US Supreme Courts have interpreted the US Constitution in ways that have supported or undermined liberty in surprising ways.
When confidential medical information can prevent a serious harm to a third party, the patient’s prima facie right to confidentiality must be balanced against the physician’s prima facie obligation to prevent serious harm to that third party.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(9):819-825. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.9.ecas1-1509.
Successful implementation of initiatives to improve screening and access to health-promotion activities at minority-serving religious institutions requires partnering with faith-based organizations, adapting interventions, and leveraging organizational infrastructure and social networks.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(7):E643-654. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.643.
Although sharing health records with psychiatric patients may cause harm, clinicians also must consider beneficence and autonomy in making this decision.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(3):253-259. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.3.ecas3-1703.