Physicians’ ethical obligation to ensure communities’ access to safe drinking water has roots in their expertise, social authority, and role as mediators.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(10):1027-1035. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.10.pfor1-1710.
Physician advocacy for climate change mitigation is justified by seven criteria including physicians’ efficacy, expertise, public trust, and proximity.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1202-1210. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.msoc1-1712.
Climate change mitigation reforms of government policy, medical curricula, and health professions organizations should be the focus of physician advocacy.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1222-1237. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.sect1-1712.
The advent of force-feeding in the new century in the context of conflict and protest made it necessary to clarify and revise the whole concept of artificial feeding and force-feeding.
The adverse health effects of climate change should be the focus of physician advocacy efforts and of conversations between physicians and their patients.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1174-1182. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.ecas3-1712.
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.
Giving undocumented immigrants and those with DACA status (DREAMers) access to health care and medical education enables them to contribute to these systems.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(3):221-233. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.3.peer1-1703.