This commentary addresses the care of an undocumented immigrant with neuromyelitis optica in the context of a state law designed to deny state-funded medical services to individuals whose presence in the United States is unlawful. It considers specific circumstances in which the law would permit or require medical care for undocumented persons in state medical facilities, including a duty to "stabilize" an "emergency medical condition" and the provision of care necessary to "protect life or safety." It also addresses dilemmas clinicians may experience when faced with an apparent tension between their professional ethical obligations and legal rules aimed at enforcing immigration policies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEthically salient issues in neurologic care may have important legal overtones. This chapter considers some of these, emphasizing how law may influence the outcome of controversies over how best to promote autonomy, beneficence, and justice in the care of individuals with neurologic disorders. Constitutional, statutory, and judicial dimensions are addressed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFProfessionalism may be defined as the obligation of the physician to uphold the primacy of patients' interests, to achieve and maintain medical competency, and to abide by high ethical standards. Recent commentary has suggested that medical professionalism is being threatened by commercialism and the legal system. Consideration of judicial rulings centered on primacy of patients' interests (informed consent, end-of-life care, and conflicts of interest), medical competence (standard of care in medical malpractice cases, medical futility cases, and confidentiality of peer review), and enforcement of ethical standards (peer review by professional organizations) demonstrates that the law generally defers to standards set by the medical profession, but competing views over what health care model is operative may generate non-deferential outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF