Virtual Mentor spoke with Dr. Stephen Epstein of Harvard Medical School about the Massachusetts ban and what other communities can learn from one state's experience.
An argument that the concept of judicious dissent can resolve the debate over a physician’s conscience-based right to refuse to provide lawful services.
An argument that an individual physician’s conscience-based decision not to offer specific, lawful medical services should not restrict patients’ access to those services.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., may prevent consumers injured by medical devices that have FDA premarket approval from receiving compensation.
Physicians who base end-of-life care decisions for patients on their own preferences may offer less treatment than the patients themselves would have wanted.
Should physicians engage beliefs and practices that do not agree with their medical judgment as a means to securing patient adherence to recommended treatment?
Medicine, a high-energy consumer and generator of much waste—some of it toxic—must scale back the health care enterprise in the interest of preserving a livable environment.
There is a market for direct-to-consumer genetic testing and a need for better consumer information and more regulation of tests and testing laboratories.