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

Mission statements offer limited benefit when patients do not have meaningful choices about where to seek care and can be misused.

Noninvasive prenatal testing arguably constitutes a form of eugenics in a social context in which certain reproductive outcomes are not valued.

“Very important persons” care contributes to multitiered, racially segregated health service delivery streams that influence clinicians’ conceptions of what patients deserve from them.

Dr Jody Steinauer joins Ethics Talk to discuss possible responses to what the Dobbs decision demands of clinician-teachers.

Extraordinary changes to the legal landscape of abortion care require reevaluating health professionals’ appropriation of conscience.

Dr Isa Ryan joins Ethics Talk to discuss her article, coauthored with Dr Ashish Premkumar and Professor Katie Watson: “Why the Post-Roe Era Requires Protecting Conscientious Provision as We Protect Conscientious Refusal in Health Care.”

Educators discussing ethically challenging topics with students should try to cultivate open mindedness while illuminating potential negative consequences that their health practice beliefs—such as refusing to provide abortion care—can have for patients, particularly those with limited options.

Two bioethicists argue that prenatal disability screening promotes negativity toward the disabled and gives parents the ability to selectively form families.

A philosophy professor argues that prenatal genetic testing allows potentially painful afflictions to be discovered prior to birth and does not unjustly discriminate against disabled people.