In medicine, life often hangs in the balance. Patients and practitioners confront complex, high-stress situations with multiple stakeholders and unclear answers. How should we distribute scarce health care resources? Which principles should govern triage? When can patients exercise meaningful choice? How should the interests of patients, family members, and medical professionals be weighed? What does it mean for a physician to pledge to “Do no harm”?
Explore how ethical challenges in medical practice and biomedical research emerge across the following five areas.
Clinical Ethics – Our commitment to bodily autonomy means that patients have the ultimate say over what forms of treatment they will undertake. Healthcare professionals, then, must ensure that their clients are made fully aware of the advantages, drawbacks, and risks of any medical intervention. Advocating for another’s health is tricky business. What does good bedside care require?
“The Inherent Conflict in Informed Consent” – A commitment to patient education is necessary for exercising real choice.
“Informed Consent and the Joe Rogan Experience” – But sometimes too much information is a problem.
“The Ethical Tradeoffs of Medical Surveillance” – Tracking health professionals doesn’t necessarily improve care.
Research Ethics – Scientific experimentation promises life-changing results. But we must always protect the rights, dignity, and welfare of study participants. What consideration do the subjects of our medical trials deserve?
“Medical Challenge Trials” – People can’t typically volunteer to test the unknown.
“When Your Will Is Not Enough” – It often takes more than consent.
“Underrepresentation in Clinical Trials” – Real knowledge requires diversity in subjects.
Health and Disease – It can be difficult to determine the precise point at which a body is no longer functioning as it should. Defining that line can have serious consequences for patients. It’s easy for diagnosis to become morally loaded and encourage stigmatization. What does it mean to be “healthy”? What does it mean when we’re not?
“Bedside Conceptual Engineering” – Medical labels (like ‘obese’) communicate more than we intend.
“Neurodivergence, Diagnosis, and Blame” – Judgments about “normal” functioning have side effects.
“Treating Psychopathy?” – Just having a condition needn’t warrant medical intervention.
End-of-Life Care – We all wish to pass in comfort and with dignity. But there’s still disagreement on medical professionals must do to ensure that the emotional and spiritual needs of terminally ill patients are met. What services should be provided and who gets to decide?
“Defining Death” – Answering the abstract question has practical consequences.
“Allowing Euthanasia” – There’s a difference between actively intervening and simply withdrawing care.
“Letting the Poor Die” – What counts as free, autonomous choice remains murky.
Healthcare Administration – Having access to medical resources (from doctors to drugs) is incredibly beneficial. Unfortunately, there aren’t nearly enough resources to go around. Inevitably, we need ways of rationing scarce goods and assessing relative need in order to make sure that they go to those who deserve them most. How can we best deliver this vital service to the public?
“The Heartless Matter of Organ Transplantation” – Recipients can be more or less deserving.
“Should Hospitals Sue Their Patients?” – Life-saving care operates as a business.
“Supervised Injection Facilities” – We can reduce existing pain or curb future instances.
“Chatbots as Medical Counselors?” – Perhaps genuine connection is overrated.
“Does Care Require Personhood?” – Or perhaps human touch remains necessary.