The public charge rule went into effect nationwide yesterday, formalizing the “public charge era” that began when the draft rule was leaked three years ago. The rule jeopardizes eligibility for legal permanent residency if applicants are deemed public charges based on even short-term use of federally funded programs, such as health insurance, housing subsidies, or food stamps. Anticipation of the rule has had chilling effects on the behavior of immigrants, who have avoided or withdrawn from health-related programs for which they are eligible. What follows is a selected bibliography designed to support learning and progress on immigrant health in a complex policy environment.
The post Immigrant Health in the Public Charge Era: 15 Essential Articles appeared first on The Hastings Center.
Who should decide whether medical intervention on a child’s body is necessary? Ideally, the person who will undergo the treatment should have a say in these decisions. Patients themselves, even if they are children, should understand all their options and assent to whatever procedures are on the table. Technically, parents are the ones providing consent… Read more
The post Who Decides? Medical Intervention for Transgender and Intersex Children appeared first on The Hastings Center.
The arrest of Harvard chemist and nanobiologist Charles Lieber on charges of lying about his research funding from China encapsulates two phenomena currently in tension: the global nature of modern science and attempts to nationalize the fruits of science.
The post Globalized Science in a Deglobalizing World appeared first on The Hastings Center.
The death of Dr Li Wenliang from COVID-19 is heartbreaking for our country and people. Dr. Li was reprimanded for messages he posted in a chat group warning fellow doctors about a mysterious infection. His death from coronavirus underscored gaps and deficiencies in our country’s health care system and system of governance.
The post Chinese Bioethicists: Silencing Doctor Impeded Early Control of Coronavirus appeared first on The Hastings Center.
Tinslee Lewis, a critically ill 1-year-old girl born with a rare heart defect and severe lung disease, has spent her entire life in the intensive care unit at Cook Children’s Hospital in Texas and undergone multiple surgeries in attempts to save her life. Tinslee’s care team has determined that she has no chance for any meaningful survival and that ongoing intensive care is harmful and causing her undue suffering. They recommend withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, against the parent’s wishes. Tinslee’s fate is being debated in court.
The post Deciding When Enough is Enough in Caring for a Child appeared first on The Hastings Center.
There is big money in using technology to find information in patient and medical staff data. Companies are rushing to cash in. The Food and Drug Administration has approved more than 40 artificial intelligence-based products for use in medicine. Tens of thousands of medical phone apps are tracking patients and gathering detailed medical information about them. These new technologies bring new ethical questions that health care organizations are poorly equipped to answer.
The post Why Health Care Organizations Need Technology Ethics Committees appeared first on The Hastings Center.
Hastings Center fellows in China discuss ethical questions about the response to the spreading coronavirus.
The post Report from China: Ethical Questions on the Response to the Coronavirus appeared first on The Hastings Center.
To address recent lawsuits that question whether the persistent of hormonal functions is consistent with death by neurologic criteria (such as the case of Jahi McMath), we proposed specific mention in a UDDA that loss of hormonal functions is not required for declaration of death by neurologic criteria.
The post Growing Consensus on the Need to Revise the Uniform Determination of Death Act: Response to Miller and Nair-Collins appeared first on The Hastings Center.
As debates continue about the decisions people make about how to die, I wish to draw wider attention to the death of Paul Drier. There was little extraordinary about his death. He was a widower, had suffered from multiple health problems, and had been on kidney dialysis for 18 months. Considered to be too ill to qualify for a transplant, he decided to end dialysis. Two aspects of Mr. Drier’s death seem worth putting on record for bioethicists to remember.
The post A Responsible Death appeared first on The Hastings Center.
It has been 50 years since the medical profession adopted the determination of death according to neurological criteria, known as “brain death.” This doctrine was codified in 1981 in the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA), which declares, “An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions or (2) irreversible… Read more
The post An Incoherent Proposal to Revise the Uniform Determination of Death Act appeared first on The Hastings Center.
Bioethics TV