When a clinician refuses to do a procedure consistent with standard of care for a patient, legal resources can be helpful.

Clinicians using governing authority to make public health policy are ethically obliged to draw upon scientific and clinical information that accords professional standards.

The default principle—that someone is free to do what he or she desires in the absence of a compelling reason why he or she should not—may make it possible to resolve ethical disputes without recourse to a particular moral framework.

Julian Savulescu's writing on conscientious objection is guided by an emphasis on the principle of distributive justice that does not allow religion to have a special status as justification.

All of us who are pursuing solutions to the obesity epidemic face clinical, ethical, and regulatory challenges. First among them is the significant role of individual lifestyle and behavior choices in causing obesity.

Medical schools should have formal curriculum on the laws and regulations that pertain to medical practice.

The principle of double effect and proportionate reason can be a useful way of assessing actions as moral or immoral.

Testimonial injustice is an expression of racism that uses identity to undermine individuals’ credibility as authoritative “knowers” of their own bodies, selves, and experiences.