Ethics of organ procurement from the unrepresented patient population.

The shortage of organs for transplantation by its nature prompts ethical dilemmas. For example, although there is an imperative to save human life and reduce suffering by maximising the supply of vital organs, there is an equally important obligation to ensure that the process by which we increase the supply respects the rights of all stakeholders. In a relatively unexamined practice in the USA, organs are procured from unrepresented decedents without their express consent. Unrepresented decedents have no known healthcare wishes or advance care planning document; they also lack a surrogate. The Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (RUAGA) of 2006 sends a mixed message about the procurement of organs from this patient population and there are hospitals that authorise donation. In addition, in adopting the RUAGA, some states included provisions that clearly allow organ procurement from unrepresented decedents. An important unanswered question is whether this practice meets the canons of ethical permissibility. The current Brief Report presents two principled approaches to the topic as a way of highlighting some of the complexities involved. Concluding remarks offer suggestions for future research and discussion.

The Physician's Duty to Treat During Pandemics.

Physicians assume a primary ethical duty to place the welfare of their patients above their own interests. Thus, for example, physicians must not exploit the patient-physician relationship for personal financial gain through the practice of self-referral. But how far does the duty to patient welfare extend? Must physicians assume a serious risk to their own health to ensure that patients receive needed care? In the past, physicians were expected to provide care during pandemics without regard to the risk to their own health. In recent decades, however, the duty to treat during pandemics has suffered from erosion even while the risks to physicians from meeting the duty has gone down. After exploring the historical evolution of the duty to treat and the reasons for the duty, I conclude that restoring a strong duty to treat would protect patient welfare without subjecting physicians to undue health risks.

Healthcare, Health, and Income.

The medicalization model of poverty leads us to devote considerable resources to treating the healthcare problems caused by poverty while neglecting the root cause of those problems - the poverty itself. Treating symptoms rather than causes is far less effective than treating causes. When correctly understood, poverty is a major public health problem that needs to be addressed directly with effective anti-poverty programs. Only then can we properly serve the healthcare needs of the poor.

International Perspectives on Physician Assistance in Dying.

When the Supreme Court of Canada recognized a constitutional right to "medical assistance in dying" last year-and the nation's Parliament enacted legislation to implement the right earlier this year-Canadian lawmakers could look to two different models for guidance. The Netherlands and Belgium recognize a broad right to assistance in dying, while Oregon and elsewhere in the United States have a narrow right. In some ways, assistance in dying in Canada follows the Dutch-Belgian approach, while, in other ways, it seems more American. Two societal factors seem relevant to the different approaches: the role that religion plays in people's lives and the trust that people place in their governments and health care systems. As other governments consider legalizing assistance in dying, an important question is whether some restrictions on the right are particularly critical. The experience to date suggests that requiring patients to be terminally ill has provided the best protection against misuse.

Clinical Criteria for Physician Aid in Dying.

More than 20 years ago, even before voters in Oregon had enacted the first aid in dying (AID) statute in the United States, Timothy Quill and colleagues proposed clinical criteria AID. Their proposal was carefully considered and temperate, but there were little data on the practice of AID at the time. (With AID, a physician writes a prescription for life-ending medication for a terminally ill, mentally capacitated adult.) With the passage of time, a substantial body of data on AID has developed from the states of Oregon and Washington. For more than 17 years, physicians in Oregon have been authorized to provide a prescription for AID. Accordingly, we have updated the clinical criteria of Quill, et al., based on the many years of experience with AID. With more jurisdictions authorizing AID, it is critical that physicians can turn to reliable clinical criteria. As with any medical practice, AID must be provided in a safe and effective manner. Physicians need to know (1) how to respond to a patient's inquiry about AID, (2) how to assess patient decision making capacity, and (3) how to address a range of other issues that may arise. To ensure that physicians have the guidance they need, Compassion & Choices convened the Physician Aid-in-Dying Clinical Criteria Committee, in July 2012, to create clinical criteria for physicians who are willing to provide AID to patients who request it. The committee includes experts in medicine, law, bioethics, hospice, nursing, social work, and pharmacy. Using an iterative consensus process, the Committee drafted the criteria over a one-year period.

Making research a requirement of treatment: why we should sometimes let doctors pressure patients to participate in research.

When a patient could be offered one of multiple established treatments, doctors should be able to offer treatment only if the patient agrees to participate in research aimed at determining which of the treatments is most effective. Making treatment conditional on research participation will help researchers complete badly needed studies.

Abortion and compelled physician speech.

Informed consent mandates for abortion providers may infringe the First Amendment's freedom of speech. On the other hand, they may reinforce the physician's duty to obtain informed consent. Courts can promote both doctrines by ensuring that compelled physician speech pertains to medical facts about abortion rather than abortion ideology and that compelled speech is truthful and not misleading.

Using payroll deduction to shelter individual health insurance from income tax.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of state laws requiring or encouraging employers to establish "section 125" cafeteria plans that shelter employees' premium contributions from tax. DATA SOURCES: Available descriptive statistics, 65 key-informant interviews, and relevant documents in study states and nationally, 2008-2009. STUDY DESIGN: Case studies were conducted in Indiana, Massachusetts, and Missouri--three states adopting laws in 2007. Descriptive quantitative information came from insurers, regulators, and surveys of employers. In each state, 15-17 semistructured but open-ended interviews were conducted with insurance agents, insurers, government officials, and third-party administration firms, and 29 informed sources were interviewed from a national perspective or other states. Key informants were selected based on their known or reported experience, in a "snowball" fashion until saturation was reached. Interview notes were coded for systematic analysis. Finally, relevant rulings, brochures, instructions, marketing materials, and other documents were collected and analyzed. FINDINGS: Despite the potential for substantial cost savings, use of section 125 plans to purchase individual insurance remained low in these states after 1 or 2 years. Absent a mandate, few employers were strongly motivated to offer these plans in order to retain an adequate workforce, and uncertainty about federal legality deterred doing so. For smaller employers, benefits to owners did not outweigh administrative complexities. Nevertheless, few downsides were found to states mandating or encouraging these plans. In particular, there is little evidence that many employers dropped group coverage as a result. CONCLUSIONS: Section 125 plans remain a limited tool for states to reduce the inequitable tax treatment of individually purchased insurance, but a complete remedy requires reform of federal tax law.

Prescription data mining and the protection of patients' interests.

Pharmaceutical companies have exploited health information technology to "mine" data from drug prescriptions and use the data to better target their sales pitches to physicians. This article considers the policy arguments and first amendment implications regarding state regulation of data mining. It concludes that the legislative provisions are desirable and should withstand constitutional challenge.