The question of whether and how results from personal genetic testing will motivate behavioral changes in consumers has only begun to receive the research attention it richly deserves.
The AAP’s guidelines on lipid screening for children raise concerns about the fundamental purpose of prevention and its role in balancing individual autonomy with the benefits of society at large.
Given the well-established correlation across cultures between poverty and unhealthy lifestyles, can it be just to hold individuals responsible for choices typical of their socioeconomic sector? Aren’t patient-responsibility programs simply conspiracies to shrink benefits to the poor?
Undocumented patients in the United States with end-stage renal disease receive “compassionate” dialysis. Such patients oscillate between being marginally well and “ill enough” to receive dialysis while clinicians wrestle with complicity in a system that both offers and withholds life-saving therapy.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(8):E778-779. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.778.
Kyle B. Brothers, MD, PhD and Esther E. Knapp, MD, MBE
Direct-to-consumer genetic testing requires that physicians share decision making with patients, not order unnecessary tests or interventions, and refer to genetic specialists when necessary.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(9):E812-818. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.812.
Lisa M. Meeks, PhD and Christopher Moreland, MD, MPH
Obstacles for applicants with disabilities illuminate admission practices that could help craft a clinical workforce that is appropriately diverse and prepared to give just, patient-centered care.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(12):E987-994. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.987.
Long-acting injectables powerfully augment HIV care, but broad acceptance and uptake could be compromised by what we know about experiences with antipsychotics.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(5):E405-409. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.405.