We must not pit immigration policy and health care needs against one another. We need better policy on immigration, and that policy should confront immigration at the workplace and at the border—not in the hospital emergency room.
Gene editing to enhance humans’ adaptability to climate change should consider safety, harm to be averted, succeeding generations, and social consequences.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(12):1186-1192. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.12.stas1-1712.
Tracy Shamas, MSN, APRN and Sarah Gillespie-Heyman, MSN, APRN
Veterans at the end of life have special needs due to posttraumatic stress disorder, environmental exposures, and the influence of military culture on their values. Those who die outside the Veterans Affairs health care system, however, can be at increased risk for receiving outpatient palliative care that is not sensitive to these factors.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(8):E787-792. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.787.
When responding to an ad for a job caring for patient-detainees along the US southern border, applicants should anticipate the need to navigate dual loyalties.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E12-17. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.12.
Force feeding, unnecessary x-rays, misusing health information, and discharging unstable patients are classic dual-loyalty dilemmas reminiscent of the Holocaust.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E38-45. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.38.
The Holocaust and the racial hygiene doctrine that helped rationalize it still overshadow contemporary debates about using gene editing for disease prevention.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(1):E49-54. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.49.
Some refugees’ illness experiences preclude them from testifying and accurately representing their own interests during asylum adjudication proceedings.
AMA J Ethics. 2021;23(2):E132-139. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2021.132.
Clinicians must avoid violating professional ethical principles and patients’ legal rights and they may not ever discriminate. So, what does that mean in practice?
AMA J Ethics. 2016;18(3):229-236. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2016.18.3.ecas4-1603.