For many physicians, lack of understanding about brain death leads to confusion and muddles interactions with patients’ loved ones at the end of life.

Criteria in statutes and tests used to diagnose brain death don’t always jibe, and this can undermine public trust in death pronouncements.

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.

Clinical needs of patients with disabilities are seen with the “medical gaze,” a depersonalized lens of evidence-based medicine and of presumed objectivity.

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.”

Perpetration-induced traumatic stress should be understood as present, not just posttraumatic, stress disorder because retraumatization is part of slaughterhouse workers’ jobs.

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.

Protecting one’s moral integrity may require a conscience clause that protects positive conscience claims by permitting individuals to perform actions that are otherwise prohibited by legal or institutional rules.