Article explains the right granted to state public health agencies by the Supreme Court in Jacobson v Massachusetts to mandate vaccination in the presence of actual or threatened danger to the health of its residents from infectious disease.
Clinical trials for the blood substitute PolyHeme exposed the possibility for ambiguous interpretation of the FDA’s waiver of informed consent for emergency research.
A philosophical analysis of how physician actions and treatment goals are defined and interpreted and how understanding this process can affect the success of the clinical encounter.
Arguments are examined for and against the ethics of allowing U.S. armed services to attempt to recruit financially vulnerable students on medical school campuses.
The ongoing anthrax vaccination case, Doe v Rumsfeld, tests whether the military can require participation in and punish refusal of a vaccination program while waiving informed consent.
The military medical ethics curriculum is outlined by the director of medical ethics programs at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences.
The physician's duty to provide emergency treatment to combatants on both sides in an armed conflict persists, even in the context of today's asymmetrical warfare where not everyone plays by the rules.