Search Results Search Sort by RelevanceMost Recent Medical Education Dec 2020 How Educators Can Help Prevent False Brain Death Diagnoses Farah Fourcand, MD and Diana M. Barratt, MD, MPH For many physicians, lack of understanding about brain death leads to confusion and muddles interactions with patients’ loved ones at the end of life. AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(12):E1010-1018. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2020.1010. Policy Forum Dec 2020 What Should We Do About the Mismatch Between Legal Criteria for Death and How Brain Death Is Diagnosed? Nathaniel M. Robbins, MD and James L. Bernat, MD Criteria in statutes and tests used to diagnose brain death don’t always jibe, and this can undermine public trust in death pronouncements. AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(12):E1038-1046. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2020.1038. In the Literature Jun 2019 Disentangling Evidence and Preference in Patient-Clinician Concordance Discussions Leah Z. G. Rand, DPhil and Zackary Berger, MD, PhD How should evidence be used to interpret and inform whether to accommodate patients’ requests for clinicians with specific traits? AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(6):E505-512. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2019.505. State of the Art and Science Apr 2016 Keeping the Backdoor to Eugenics Ajar?: Disability and the Future of Prenatal Screening Gareth M. Thomas, PhD and Barbara Katz Rothman, PhD Noninvasive prenatal testing arguably constitutes a form of eugenics in a social context in which certain reproductive outcomes are not valued. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):406-415. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.stas1-1604. Personal Narrative Feb 2023 How Should We Respond When Clinicians’ Calls to CPS Are Punitively Weaponized Against Families? Arielle Schecter, MD This narrative illuminates need for students and clinicians to be well prepared to face ethically and structurally complex realities of identifying and responding to children. AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(2):E159-165. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2023.159. Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 1 Ludger Schols, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502. Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 2 Georg Marckmann, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502. Viewpoint Jan 2006 Is Prenatal Genetic Screening Unjustly Discriminatory? Jeff McMahan, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):50-52. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped1-0601. Viewpoint Jan 2006 The Uncertain Rationale for Prenatal Disability Screening David Wasserman, JD and Adrienne Asch, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):53-56. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped2-0601. Policy Forum May 2007 The Principle of Double Effect and Proportionate Reason Nicholas J. Kockler, MS, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(5):369-374. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.5.pfor2-0705. Pagination Current page 1 Page 2 Next page Next › Last page Last »
Medical Education Dec 2020 How Educators Can Help Prevent False Brain Death Diagnoses Farah Fourcand, MD and Diana M. Barratt, MD, MPH For many physicians, lack of understanding about brain death leads to confusion and muddles interactions with patients’ loved ones at the end of life. AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(12):E1010-1018. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2020.1010.
Policy Forum Dec 2020 What Should We Do About the Mismatch Between Legal Criteria for Death and How Brain Death Is Diagnosed? Nathaniel M. Robbins, MD and James L. Bernat, MD Criteria in statutes and tests used to diagnose brain death don’t always jibe, and this can undermine public trust in death pronouncements. AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(12):E1038-1046. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2020.1038.
In the Literature Jun 2019 Disentangling Evidence and Preference in Patient-Clinician Concordance Discussions Leah Z. G. Rand, DPhil and Zackary Berger, MD, PhD How should evidence be used to interpret and inform whether to accommodate patients’ requests for clinicians with specific traits? AMA J Ethics. 2019;21(6):E505-512. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2019.505.
State of the Art and Science Apr 2016 Keeping the Backdoor to Eugenics Ajar?: Disability and the Future of Prenatal Screening Gareth M. Thomas, PhD and Barbara Katz Rothman, PhD Noninvasive prenatal testing arguably constitutes a form of eugenics in a social context in which certain reproductive outcomes are not valued. AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(4):406-415. doi: 10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.4.stas1-1604.
Personal Narrative Feb 2023 How Should We Respond When Clinicians’ Calls to CPS Are Punitively Weaponized Against Families? Arielle Schecter, MD This narrative illuminates need for students and clinicians to be well prepared to face ethically and structurally complex realities of identifying and responding to children. AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(2):E159-165. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2023.159.
Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 1 Ludger Schols, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502.
Case and Commentary Feb 2005 Quality of Life and Prenatal Decisions, Commentary 2 Georg Marckmann, MD Virtual Mentor. 2005;7(2):136-140. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2005.7.2.ccas1-0502.
Viewpoint Jan 2006 Is Prenatal Genetic Screening Unjustly Discriminatory? Jeff McMahan, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):50-52. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped1-0601.
Viewpoint Jan 2006 The Uncertain Rationale for Prenatal Disability Screening David Wasserman, JD and Adrienne Asch, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2006;8(1):53-56. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2006.8.1.oped2-0601.
Policy Forum May 2007 The Principle of Double Effect and Proportionate Reason Nicholas J. Kockler, MS, PhD Virtual Mentor. 2007;9(5):369-374. doi: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.5.pfor2-0705.