Mandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate. I describe an algorithm for justified mandatory vaccination.

Jan 1, 2025 · When should doctors nudge their patients towards the treatments they think are best? If the nudge is compatible with the patient giving informed consent, then the nudge could be permissible. To be compatible with informed consent, the nudge must, at minimum: (1) not make the patient’s understanding worse and (2) not make it hard for the patient to resist consenting. Arguably, many nudges ...

Beauchamp T L, Childress J F. Oxford University Press, 2001, £19.95, pp 454. ISBN 0-19-514332-9. The Principles of Biomedical Ethics by Beauchamp and Childress is a classic in the field of medical ethics. The first edition was published in 1979 and “unleashed” the four principles of respect for autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice on the newly emerging field.

Dec 20, 2024 · In Who shall go first?A multicriteria approach to patient selection for first clinical trials of cardiac xenotransplantation, Kögel et al recommend the inclusion of patients who (1) have a (high) medical need for an allograft, (2) have the capacity to benefit from a xenograft, (3) have a ‘real’ choice between enrolment in a first-in-human clinical trial and an alternative life-sustaining ...

Journal of Medical Ethics (JME) features articles on ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients.

Dec 20, 2024 · Introduction. Autonomy is a central concept in medical ethics. It links self-governance with rationality and expresses the importance of individuals having the capacity and the freedom to make decisions about their own lives.1–4 A key implication is that patients decide for themselves whether or not to receive medical treatment. This manifests in the norms that relate to informed consent.5 ...

How important is it, morally speaking, that banning the sale of organs removes the best option available to would-be organ sellers? According to a widespread argument called the best option argument, this is very important. In a recent article I criticised such reasoning, drawing on considerations of distributive justice. Luke Semrau has argued that I have misunderstood the best option argument.

This paper argues that the four prima facie principles—beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice—afford a good and widely acceptable basis for ‘doing good medical ethics’. It confronts objections that the approach is simplistic, incompatible with a virtue-based approach to medicine, that it requires respect for autonomy always to have priority when the principles ...

Jan 5, 2024 · The UK government has recently committed to adopting a new policy—dubbed ‘Martha’s Rule’—which has been characterised as providing patients the right to rapidly access a second clinical opinion in urgent or contested cases. Support for the rule emerged following the death of Martha Mills in 2021, after doctors failed to admit her to intensive care despite concerns raised by her parents.

Introduction. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan wrote an article in Human Life Review that (to our knowledge) first directly raised the possibility that the fetus can “respond to pain”.1 Subsequently, the possibility of fetal pain was raised in a review in the New England Journal of Medicine,2 an accompanying editorial,3 and a clinical trial examining the use of analgesia and anaesthesia ...