Clinical Ethicists Awakened: Addressing Two Generations of Clinical Ethics Issues Involving Undocumented Patients.

Because the United States has failed to provide a pathway to citizenship for its long-term undocumented population, clinical ethicists have more than 20 years of addressing issues that arise in caring for this population. I illustrate that these challenges fall into two sets of issues. First-generation issues involve finding ethical ways to treat and discharge patients who are uninsured and ineligible for safety-net resources. More recently, ethicists have been invited to help address second-generation issues that involve facilitating the presentation for care of undocumented patients. In the current environment of widespread fear of deportation in the immigrant community, ethicists are working with health care providers to address patient concerns that prevent them from seeking care. I illustrate that in both generations of issues, values implicit within health care, namely, caring, efficiency, and promotion of public health, guide the strategies that are acceptable and recommended.

Ethical, legal and social implications of forensic molecular phenotyping in South Africa.

Conventional forensic DNA analysis involves a matching principle, which compares DNA profiles from evidential samples to those from reference samples of known origin. In casework, however, the accessibility to a reference sample is not guaranteed which limits the use of DNA as an investigative tool. This has led to the development of phenotype prediction, which uses SNP analysis to estimate the physical appearance of the sample donor. Physical traits, such as eye, hair and skin colour, have been associated with certain alleles within specific genes involved in the melanogenesis pathways. These genetic markers are also associated with ancestry and their trait prediction ability has mainly been assessed in European and North American populations. This has prompted research investigating the discriminatory power of these markers in other populations, especially those exhibiting admixture. South Africa is well known for its diversity, and the viability of these particular SNPs still needs to be assessed within this population. South African law currently restricts the use of DNA for molecular phenotyping, and there are also numerous ethical and social considerations, all of which are discussed.

[The Rule of Rescue - Irrational and Discriminating?] / Rule of Rescue vs. Rettung statistischer Leben.

State of the debate: The "Rule of Rescue" refers to the practice that, in order to save people from immediate peril, societies incur high costs largely irrespective of the fact that many more lives could be saved under alternative uses of the resources. The practice has been found difficult to explain, let alone justify, and has often been criticized. In the early literature in the context of the Oregon rationing experiment, the irrationality objection dominated in view of the obvious lack to consider opportunity costs. More recent contributions, taking account of the declining support for purely efficiency-oriented prioritization approaches, advance an equity objection: The practice discriminates against statistical lives. Intent of the present contribution: This article provides a critical assessment of both objections. Results: The following contentions result from the analysis: 1. The equity objection is unfounded; 2. Following the rule of rescue is (in a certain sense) inefficient, but it is not irrational; 3. The criticized judgments result from deep-seated shortcomings in the action-theoretical concepts used (or rather, omitted) in the literature. These shortcomings are inherent in the consequentialist framework dominating the debate and deserve more attention.

Genetic non-discrimination policy in Canada: Assessing windows of opportunity for policy change.

As the ease of obtaining genetic information for both the diagnosis and treatment of diseases has become increasingly common, so have concerns about the misuse of such information. The obstacles Canada faces in adopting genetic non-discrimination legislation have left health leaders with a lack of clear direction. Using the Kingdon agenda-setting framework, this article will identify lost opportunities for policy change and will analyze the potential for the adoption of a genetic non-discrimination policy in Canada. Windows of opportunity for policy change have existed in the past, but these windows have closed prior to a policy being adopted. More recently, the alignment of problem, policy, and politics streams in the agenda-setting process has resulted in a new window of opportunity. The adoption of a clear and coherent policy will provide the public with protection and health leaders with greater direction around genetic information.

Genetic discrimination: international perspectives.

Genetic discrimination (GD) is a complex, multifaceted ethical, psychosocial, and legal phenomenon. It is defined as the differential treatment of asymptomatic individuals or their relatives on the basis of their real or assumed genetic characteristics. This article presents an overview of GD within the contemporary international context. It describes the concept of GD and its contextual features, reviews research evidence regarding people's experiences of GD and the impact of GD within a range of domains, and provides an overview of legal and policy responses to GD that have emerged globally. We argue that GD is a significant and internationally established phenomenon that requires multilevel responses to ensure social justice and equitable outcomes for all citizens. Future research should monitor GD and its impacts within the community as well as institutions and should evaluate the effectiveness of legislative, policy, community education, and systemic responses.

Human rights and ethical considerations for a tobacco-free generation.

In recent years, a new tobacco 'endgame' has been proposed: the denial of tobacco sale to any citizen born after a certain year, thus creating new tobacco-free generations. The proposal would not directly affect current smokers, but would impose a restriction on potential future generations of smokers. This paper examines some key legal and ethical issues raised by this proposal, critically assessing how an obligation to protect human rights might limit or support a state's ability to phase out tobacco.

Why Is Studying the Genetics of Intelligence So Controversial?

From the very beginning, studies of the nature and nurture of intelligence have been closely associated with an interest in intervening, and those interventions have been surrounded by controversy. The nature of those controversies has not always been the same, however. Since the mid-nineteenth century, when Francis Galton imagined a science that would assess the extent to which a trait like "genius" was due to nature or due to nurture, science and technology have changed dramatically, and so have the interventions that have been envisioned in light of those developments. A scientist today can search for particular stretches of DNA and assess whether differences in those stretches are associated with differences in a human trait of interest; a genetic counselor today can genetically test an individual (be it an embryo, fetus, newborn, child, or adult) and provide information about what that genetic result means, allowing for interventions that can range from terminating a pregnancy to prescribing chemotherapy. So when one asks a question like, "Why is studying the genetics of intelligence controversial?," it is important to realize up front that the answer will be, "It can be controversial for a variety of different reasons, and those reasons have evolved over time." The purpose of this essay is to provide a survey of the controversies that surround genetic studies of intelligence. With the survey in place, I will then draw out several lessons both for scientists who study the genetics of intelligence as well as for science studies scholars (bioethicists, philosophers, historians, sociologists) who reflect and comment on the controversies surrounding that research.

[Abortion and conscientious objection]. / Aborcja a klauzula sumienia.

Polish laws specify the parties responsible for lawful medical care in the availability of abortion differently than the Resolution of the Council of Europe. According to Polish regulations they include all Polish doctors while according to the Resolution, the state. Polish rules should not discriminate against anyone in connection with his religion or belief, even more so because the issue of abortion is an example of an unresolved ethical dispute. The number of lawful abortion in Poland does not exceed 1000 per year and can be carried out by only a few specialists contracted by the National Health Fund. Sufficient information and assistance should be provided to all pregnant women by the National Health Fund. The participation of all physicians in the informing process is not necessary, as evidenced by the lack of complaints to provide information on where in vitro fertilization treatment can be found - until recently only available when paid for by the individual and performed in much larger numbers than abortion. Entities performing this paid procedure made sure to provide information on their own. The rejection of the right to the conscientious objection clause by negating the right to refuse information may lead some to give up the profession or cause the termination of certain professionals on the basis of the professed worldview. Meanwhile, doctors are not allowed to be discriminated against on the basis of their conscience or religion.

ACCESS OF SINGLE WOMEN TO FERTILITY TREATMENT: A CASE OF INCIDENTAL DISCRIMINATION?

The purpose of this article is to evaluate the extent to which single women have access to publicly funded fertility treatment. It claims that, despite the fact that great progress has been made in removing gender inequalities in the area of assisted reproduction in England and Wales in recent years, there are points in the regulatory framework that still allow for discrimination against single women. The article builds on recent studies concerning the reforms brought about by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (HFEA 2008). However, it focusses on publicly funded treatment, thus directing scholarly attention away from the controversies over the amended s 13(5) HFEA 1990. It argues that the primary reason for remaining inequalities can be traced back to (a) the limitations of the current legislative framework; (b) the ambiguities inherent in the regulatory framework, which in the context of publicly funded fertility treatment is determined by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines and Clinical Commissioning Groups and Health Boards' resource allocation policies; and (c) the remaining confusion about the relationship between 'welfare of the child' assessments and eligibility criteria in National Health Service rationing decisions. The article argues that the current regulation does not go far enough in acknowledging the inability of single women to conceive naturally, but at the same time that it struggles to address the fluidity of contemporary familial relationships. The analysis presents an opportunity to contribute to debates about the role of law in shaping the scope of reproductive autonomy, gender equality and social justice.

On fat oppression.

Contemporary Western societies are obsessed with the "obesity epidemic," dieting, and fitness. Fat people violate the Western conscience by violating a thinness norm. In virtue of violating the thinness norm, fat people suffer many varied consequences. Is their suffering morally permissible, or even obligatory? In this paper, I argue that the answer is no. I examine contemporary philosophical accounts of oppression and draw largely on the work of Sally Haslanger to generate a set of conditions sufficient for some phenomena to count as oppression, and I illustrate the account's value using the example of gender oppression. I then apply the account to fat people, examine empirical evidence, and argue that the suffering of fat people counts as oppression (and therefore, generally, discriminating against fat people in virtue of their being fat is morally wrong).

Mad scientist: the unique case of a published delusion.

In 1951, entomologist Jay Traver published in the Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington her personal experiences with a mite infestation of her scalp that resisted all treatment and was undetectable to anyone other than herself. Traver is recognized as having suffered from Delusory Parasitosis: her paper shows her to be a textbook case of the condition. The Traver paper is unique in the scientific literature in that its conclusions may be based on data that was unconsciously fabricated by the author's mind. The paper may merit retraction on the grounds of error or even scientific misconduct "by reason of insanity," but such a retraction raises the issue of discrimination against the mentally ill. This article asks what responsibilities journals have when faced with delusions disguised as science, what right editors have to question the sanity of an author, and what should be done about the Traver paper itself. By placing higher emphasis on article content than author identity, scientific integrity is maintained and a balance is struck between avoiding discrimination against the mentally ill and not preventing patients from seeking needed treatment.

[Ethical issues and countermeasures in AIDS prevention].

With the rapid spread of AIDS, the ethical issues of its prevention is intensify more and more, it mainly reflected in the four areas such as discrimination of disease and moral panic, individual rights and public health, privacy and right to know, social responsibility and behavior guidance. To resolve these ethical conflicts and safeguard legitimate rights of AIDS patients, we must adhere to love and tolerance, favorable and fair, the principles of autonomy and coordination, thus promoting AIDS prevention, maintaining social ethics and justice, equal and harmonious reconstruction of the ethical relationship.

Structural distress: experiences of moral distress related to structural stigma during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a significant toll on the health of structurally vulnerable patient populations as well as healthcare workers. The concepts of structural stigma and moral distress are important and interrelated, yet rarely explored or researched in medical education. Structural stigma refers to how discrimination towards certain groups is enacted through policy and practice. Moral distress describes the tension and conflict that health workers experience when they are unable to fulfil their duties due to circumstances outside of their control. In this study, the authors explored how resident physicians perceive moral distress in relation to structural stigma. An improved understanding of such experiences may provide insights into how to prepare future physicians to improve health equity. METHODS: Utilizing constructivist grounded theory methodology, 22 participants from across Canada including 17 resident physicians from diverse specialties and 5 faculty members were recruited for semi-structured interviews from April-June 2020. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: Results describe a distinctive form of moral distress called structural distress, which centers upon the experience of powerlessness leading resident physicians to go above and beyond the call of duty, potentially worsening their psychological well-being. Faculty play a buffering role in mitigating the impact of structural distress by role modeling vulnerability and involving residents in policy decisions. CONCLUSION: These findings provide unique insights into teaching and learning about the care of structurally vulnerable populations and faculty's role related to resident advocacy and decision-making. The concept of structural distress may provide the foundation for future research into the intersection between resident well-being and training related to health equity.

Physician autonomy or discrimination: the risks and limits of saying "no".

Respect for patient autonomy is a critical concept in the training of all physicians. Most physicians will make clinical recommendations on a daily basis that reflect a marriage of evidence-based medical fact and the deeply felt aspirations and boundaries that patients share with them. While most physicians are well versed and comfortable managing issues of patient autonomy, many are less confident about ethical and legal guidelines for expressing their own autonomy in clinical decision-making. This paper will review the legal landscape surrounding the patient-physician relationship with a focus on when and how physicians can exercise their personal and professional autonomy in their clinical practice.

Those who tan and those who don't: A natural experiment on colorism.

Are darker-skinned workers discriminated against in the labor market? Studies using survey data have shown that darker skin tone is associated with increased labor market disadvantages. However, it is hard to refute the possibility that other factors correlated with skin tones might affect employment outcomes. To overcome this inherent limitation, we use a natural experiment: we utilize changes in one's own skin tone, generated by exposure to the sun, to explore the effect of skin tone on the tendency to be employed. We find that those people whose skin tone becomes darker by exposure to the sun (but not others) are less likely to be employed when the UV radiation in the previous three weeks in the area in which they reside is greater. These within-person findings hold even when controlling for the week, the year, the region, demographic characteristics and the occupation and industry one is employed in.