The arguments for mandatory vaccination with human papillomavirus vaccine differs from the justification for mandatory use of vaccines that protect against more easily transmitted diseases.

The ongoing anthrax vaccination case, Doe v Rumsfeld, tests whether the military can require participation in and punish refusal of a vaccination program while waiving informed consent.

When the patient delivers a low-birth-weight infant that requires extensive time in the neonatal intensive, should she be held responsible? Where do we draw the line? More importantly, on what basis do we draw the line?

The rule of double effect can help Catholic institutions determine whether terminal sedation is ever morally acceptable.

Article explains the right granted to state public health agencies by the Supreme Court in Jacobson v Massachusetts to mandate vaccination in the presence of actual or threatened danger to the health of its residents from infectious disease.

US case law protects a woman's right to refuse life-sustaining medical treatment for her fetus on religious grounds.

A landmark court case in California determined that a competent adult patient has the right to forgo medical treatment and the patient's autonomy supersedes the state's interest in preserving the patient's life.