Emergency research that requires exception from informed consent presents challenges in defining and reaching the at-risk community.

Suspected child abuse cases can be identified and repeat hospitalizations of such cases prevented using multidisciplinary teams to evaluate pediatric burns.

The AMA Code of Medical Ethics’ opinions related to health care for incarcerated people.

There is no morally compelling reason to distinguish a doctor from a tank driver on the battlefield except for the fact that both sides agree to protect medical personnel.

Despite a tendency to react otherwise, there is no obvious reason to believe that economically disadvantaged people ought not to be exposed to the same levels of research risk as the rest of the population.

Public and private choices about allocation of funds for research raise a social-justice question: are these funding sources making fair decisions about where to invest their resources? The NIH has the clearest obligation to do so because it is taxpayer-supported.

The question that comes to mind when one considers the risks of a clinical trial is, “Why would anyone agree to participate?” Interviews with trial volunteers and their family members make clear that often it is the appeal of discovering something new and unknown.

A patient’s refusal of tracheostomy during an anticipated difficult intubation prompts critical questions about how to best express respect for a pediatric patient’s autonomy and whether and when deviation from standard of care is clinically and ethically appropriate.

Eliciting the patient’s motives and goals and helping the patient and her loved ones explore alternatives are essential to maintaining trusting relationships and open communication.