Institutional review boards (IRBs) have the responsibility to ensure the protection of human-research subjects and are legally liable if they fail to do so.
An argument that the concept of judicious dissent can resolve the debate over a physician’s conscience-based right to refuse to provide lawful services.
An argument that an individual physician’s conscience-based decision not to offer specific, lawful medical services should not restrict patients’ access to those services.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., may prevent consumers injured by medical devices that have FDA premarket approval from receiving compensation.
The federal requirement for providing emergency medical care to those who cannot pay has been unsuccessful in eliminating refusal of care and the practice of “patient dumping.”
Physicians who base end-of-life care decisions for patients on their own preferences may offer less treatment than the patients themselves would have wanted.