Deborah M. Eng, MS, MA and Scott J. Schweikart, JD, MBE
A just culture perspective suggests that punitive responses to those who err should be reserved for those who have willfully and irremediably caused harm.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(9):E779-783. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.779.
Joel T. Wu, JD, MPH, MA and Jennifer B. McCormick, PhD, MPP
False health-related speech can cause harm, but it’s not restricted unless it’s obscene. Physicians are obliged not only to correct patients’ false beliefs, but to engage digital spaces in which false claims thrive.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1052-1058. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1052.
Government can regulate false speech and professional speech, which bans “gag laws” and compelled speech about laws to restrict abortion, for example. How should health professions share regulatory responsibility with government to prevent true speech about health information from being stifled?
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(11):E1041-1048. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1041.
Victoire Fokom Defo, MD and Joël Fokom Domgue, MD, MPH
HPV tests are alternatives to Pap smear screening that enable women to self-collect specimens and might be the best cervical cancer prevention strategy for many.
AMA J Ethics. 2020;22(2):E116-125. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2020.116.