In situations with limited medical resources, be they personnel, equipment, or time, clinicians use “triage” to determine which patients receive treatment. What type of treatment a patient receives depends on the triage “lottery” rules in place. Although these rules for sorting patients and distributing resources are standardized for most situations, they must be somewhat altered after overwhelming, nonstandard disasters.

The ethics of providing health care in resource-poor environments is a complex topic. It implies two related questions: What can we do with the resources on hand? Of all the things we can do, which ones should we do? “Resource-poor” environments are situations in which clinicians, organizations, or healthcare systems have the knowledge and skills, but not the means, to carry out highly effective and beneficial interventions. Determinants of a population’s health often rely less on disease and injury management than (...) on recognizing and meeting their basic needs. Many of the world’s people with the greatest health problems live in fragile contexts and remote areas. Their access to food, safe water, personal safety, improved sanitation facilities, and health care remains elusive, with availability often based on socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, or geography. Of course, ethical international healthcare work also requires an understanding of the illnesses and injuries that most frequently plague the population. To function ethically and to know both what can and what should be done with available resources, individuals and organizations involved in international healthcare must be experienced, adaptable, culturally sensitive, inspired, situationally aware, beneficent, courageous, honest, and fair. (shrink)

The ethics of providing health care in resource-poor environments is a complex topic. It implies two related questions: What can we do with the resources on hand? Of all the things we can do, which ones should we do? “Resource-poor” environments are situations in which clinicians, organizations, or healthcare systems have the knowledge and skills, but not the means, to carry out highly effective and beneficial interventions. Determinants of a population’s health often rely less on disease and injury management than (...) on recognizing and meeting their basic needs. Many of the world’s people with the greatest health problems live in fragile contexts and remote areas. Their access to food, safe water, personal safety, improved sanitation facilities, and health care remains elusive, with availability often based on socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, or geography. Of course, ethical international healthcare work also requires an understanding of the illnesses and injuries that most frequently plague the population. To function ethically and to know both what can and what should be done with available resources, individuals and organizations involved in international healthcare must be experienced, adaptable, culturally sensitive, inspired, situationally aware, beneficent, courageous, honest, and fair. (shrink)

The world awaits a SARS-CoV-2 virus vaccine to keep the populace healthy, fully reopen their economies, and return their social and healthcare systems to “normal.” Vaccine safety and efficacy requires meticulous testing and oversight; this paper describes how despite grandiose public statements, the current vaccine development, testing, and production methods may prove to be ethically dubious, medically dangerous, and socially volatile. The basic moral concern is the potential danger to the health of human test subjects and, eventually, many vaccine recipients. (...) This is further complicated by economic and political pressures to reduce government oversight on rushed vaccine testing and production, nationalistic distribution goals, and failure to plan for the widespread immunization needed to produce global herd immunity. As this paper asserts, the public must be better informed to assess promises about the novel vaccines being produced and to tolerate delays and uncertainty. (shrink)

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to feature editor Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

Given the money, prestige and power at stake in high-level sports, ethical lapses are hardly surprising. Nor are the rules, people, and organizations we entrust to punish infractions and ensure fair play. Similarly, the high stakes involved in medical education invite ethical slips. Yet, there are not only few referees in this all-important “game,” but also the subject itself has been almost entirely off-limits in the academic literature.

Physician-patient communication is not optimal. It suffers from an imbalance of information and power, misunderstandings and incomplete information transferred between the parties, and time constraints. Time constraints are due to patient volume, physician responsibilities, and explicit or implicit time restrictions imposed by patient insurers or physician employers. Communication is also complicated by a hesitancy to ask questions or give specific information, delays in accessing parties to transfer important information (usually, it is difficult to contact or recontact the physician), and poor (...) communication skills. These difficulties do not universally exist among patients and clinicians—but are common enough to be discussed regularly in medical journals and in the popular media. Some of these problems are more frequently encountered in certain patient or physician subsets (e.g., certain medical specialties, practice locations, patient age groups, and cultural groups). (shrink)

The patient was a 19-year-old man who was the victim of an accidental head injury. The attending neurosurgeon felt that, due to uncontrollable and repeated elevated intracranial pressures, the patient would die within 48 hours. The patient's mother requested that the neurosurgeon contact a urologist to collect the patient's sperm for implantation into the patient's girlfriend. The neurosurgeon felt that the situation raised a number of ethical issues and requested that the hospital's bioethics committee consider the case.

Telemedicine encompasses medical practice, teaching, and research with real-time interactions over distances too great for unaided communication. It includes audio and video transmissions, either separately or combined, and can be done through mechanical or electronic means. In many ways, telemedicine is a subset of medical informatics, itself a rapidly developing field. Prior definitions have been broader, including not only medical practice over distance, but also simple information transfer.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to feature editor Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to feature editor Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to feature editor Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will igve you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to feature editor Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This section is meant to be a mutual effort. If you find an article you think should be abstracted in this section, do not be bashful—submit it for consideration to Kenneth V. Iserson care of CQ. If you do not like the editorial comments, this will give you an opportunity to respond in the letters section. Your input is desired and anticipated.

This paper describes the Antarctic environment, the mission and work setting at the U.S. research stations, the general population and living conditions, and the healthcare situation. It also dispels some common misconceptions that persist about this environment and about the scope and quality of medicine practiced there. The paper then describes specific ethical issues that arise in this environment, incorporating examples drawn from both the author’s experiences and those of his colleagues. The ethics of providing healthcare in resource-poor environments implies (...) two related questions. The first is: What can we do with the available resources? This suggests that clinicians must not only know how to use all available equipment and supplies in the standard manner, but also that they must be willing and able to go beyond standard procedures and improvise, when necessary. The second question is: Of all the things we can do, which ones should we do? This paper addresses both questions in relation to Antarctic medical care. It describes the wide range of activities required of healthcare providers and some specific ethical issues that arise. Finally, it suggests some remedies to ameliorate some of those issues. (shrink)