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.
A landmark court case in California determined that a competent adult patient has the right to forgo medical treatment and the patient's autonomy supersedes the state's interest in preserving the patient's life.
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.
Physicians can ethically withhold information in situations where full disclosure of a diagnosis or treatment would cause great psychological harm to the patient.
Dr Oluwole Jegede joins Ethics Talk to discuss his article, coauthored with Drs Julio C. Nunes, Terence Tumenta, Carmen Black, and Joao P. DeAquino: “What Would Equitable Harm Reduction Look Like?”
The Domenici Wellstone Equitable Treatment Act sought to increase access to mental health care services and improve the efficiency and fairness of insurance coverage for mental illness.
A pre-med student relates his family's experiences in trying to get his strong-willed grandfather to adhere to a strict medical care regimen for his chronic condition.