Establishing a framework for a physician assistant/bioethics dual degree program.

: Numerous medical schools currently offer a master of arts (MA) in bioethics dual degree for physicians. A degree in bioethics enhances the care physicians provide to patients and prepares physicians to serve on ethics committees and consult services. Additionally, they may work on institutional and public policy issues related to ethics. Several physician assistant (PA) programs currently offer a master of public health (MPH) dual degree for PAs. A degree in public health prepares PAs for leadership roles in meeting community health needs. With the success of PA/MPH dual degree programs, we argue here that a PA/bioethics dual degree would be another opportunity to advance the PA profession and consider how such a program might be implemented. The article includes the individual perspectives of the authors, one of whom completed a graduate-level certificate in bioethics concurrently with his 2-year PA program, while the other served as a bioethics program director.

Nursing ethics in the seventh-day adventist religious tradition.

Nurses' religious beliefs influence their motivations and perspectives, including their practice of ethics in nursing care. When the impact of these beliefs is not recognized, great potential for unethical nursing care exists. Thus, this article examines how the theology of one religious tradition, Seventh-day Adventism (SDA), could affect nurses. An overview of SDA history and beliefs is presented, which explains why 'medical missionary' work is central to SDAs. Theological foundations that would permeate an SDA nurse's view of the nursing metaparadigm concepts of person, health, environment (i.e. community), and nursing (i.e. service) are presented. The ethical principles guiding SDA nurses (i.e. principled, case-based, and care ethics) and the implications of these theological foundations for nurses are noted in a case study.

Palliative sedation as part of a continuum of palliative care.

Three issues seem to animate those who advocate the move toward a broad allowance of physician-assisted death. The first is the supposed failure of palliative care in extreme cases. We challenge the notion that palliative care ever fails. When palliative sedation is understood to be a routine continuation of palliative care, as opposed to a last-ditch response to a dramatic failure, then palliative care will never fail. The second focuses on helping patients maintain a sense of control in their final days and hours. We believe that continued intimate involvement in each of the final stages that is essential in the palliative care-palliative sedation continuum will be more effective palliative care and still grant control to the patient under the principle of respect for autonomy. The third issue is the charge that palliative sedation is a euphemism for physician-assisted death. We reject that charge.