One-third of all new GoFundMe campaigns in the United States are for COVID-19-related needs. This shows where we have failed as a society. It is a makeshift response to institutional failures and not a fair or sustainable solution to crises.
The post Crowdfunding for Covid-Related Needs: Unfair and Inadequate appeared first on The Hastings Center.
03/30/2020
The Coronavirus: Signs of Hope?
Written by Neil Levy These are scary times. The death toll from Covid-19 raises hour by hour and in most countries the rate of new infections continues to grow. While most of us know that if we contract the virus the disease will likely be mild for us, we have friends and family who are […]
03/30/2020
Notarizing Advance Directives in a Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred advance care planning. But there is a big obstacle for those individuals who are already patients in healthcare institutions like hospitals and long-term care.
There are no authorized witnesses or notaries available,...
This essay received an honourable mention in the undergraduate category. Written by University of Oxford student, Angelo Ryu. Introduction The scope of modern administration is vast. We expect the state to perform an ever-increasing number of tasks, including the provision of services and the regulation of economic activity. This requires the state to make […]
Last month, I blogged about Charlie's Law legislation, which would mandate mediation before an NHS Trust may take a clinician-parent treatment conflict (like Alfie Evans and Charlie Gard) to the High Court.
This month, a different MP (Bambos Charalambous) introduced a separate bill, Children (Access to Treatment). Like Charlie's Law, this bill aims to avoid
"expensive and intensive court proceedings." It aims to accomplish that by:
1. Requiring access to mediation services in hospitals
2. Providing access to clinical ethics committees
3. Providing swift second medical opinions
4. Providing access to legal aid
5. Creating a new test of “disproportionate risk of significant harm” that clarifies if a treatment is not harmful and reputable doctors are willing to provide it, no one should be prevented from seeking that treatment
This month, a different MP (Bambos Charalambous) introduced a separate bill, Children (Access to Treatment). Like Charlie's Law, this bill aims to avoid
"expensive and intensive court proceedings." It aims to accomplish that by:
1. Requiring access to mediation services in hospitals
2. Providing access to clinical ethics committees
3. Providing swift second medical opinions
4. Providing access to legal aid
5. Creating a new test of “disproportionate risk of significant harm” that clarifies if a treatment is not harmful and reputable doctors are willing to provide it, no one should be prevented from seeking that treatment
This graphic reminds us and summarizes all of the concerns repeatedly described with detail on this blog thread. It comes from Google Images and I don't recall displaying it on a previous Volume of our topic. I am sure there are additi...
03/28/2020
COVID-19 Patient Decision Aid
The Colorado Program for Patient Centered Decisions has released a patient decision aid for patients to make choices about whether they would want mechanical ventilation.
This one-page document is not an advance directive. Rather, it just asks about p...
03/28/2020
COVID-19 Patient Decision Aid
The Colorado Program for Patient Centered Decisions has released a patient decision aid for patients to make choices about whether they would want mechanical ventilation.
This one-page document is not an advance directive. Rather, it just asks about p...
This essay was the runner up in the graduate category of the 6th Annual Oxford Uehiro Prize in Practical Ethics. Written by University of Oxford student Matthew Minehan. INTRODUCTION Sally is a healthy young woman who suffers catastrophic brain trauma. Over many months, her doctors subject her to functional Magnetic Resonance Imagining (fMRI) scans and […]
Bioethics TV