Medical Ethics Advisor – May 1, 2007
May 1, 2007
View Issues
-
HPV vaccine: Doctors welcome it but question mandate of anticancer shot
The vaccine that provides protection against four types of human papillomavirus (HPV), a leading cause of cervical cancer, is recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), but drives to mandate it for adolescent girls have created a storm of controversy. -
Hospice as continuation of care not just end of the road
Hospice evolved from the need to provide medical and social support to terminally ill patients in the last weeks of their lives. But while the benefits hospice can provide have expanded, the perception that hospice is where patients go to die has, until recently, stayed the same. -
Need to blow the whistle? A disclosure policy will help
For a doctor, telling a patient or patient's family that a medical error has happened in the course of his or her care is hard enough. But what if the error was committed by another provider? -
Minimally conscious patients not being tracked
While the media glare on cases like those of brain-damaged, "vegetative" patients such as Terri Schiavo and Terry Wallis has brought plenty of attention to the questions surrounding the recovery of severely brain-injured patients, it has done little to clear up confusion, according to medical ethics experts. -
The limits of privacy with patients with STDs
If a patient has a sexually transmitted disease and you are fearful of him or her infecting others, you may be tempted to inform the patient's spouse or significant other. However, this is the patient's decision to make... not the doctor's. -
KS court: Doctors, patients are 'suppliers,' 'consumers'
A Kansas Supreme Court ruling that defined physicians as "suppliers" prompted swift action by legislators, who have taken action on a bill that would exclude health care providers from being sued for deceptive practices under the state Consumer Protection Act.