Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
 arrow  Full Text of this article
space
 arrow  PDF of this article
(PDFs free after 6 months)
space
 arrow  Figures/Tables List
space
box Services
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search                        
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
  arrow  Lo, B.
space
  arrow  Katz, M. H.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space

ACADEMIA AND CLINIC

Clinical Decision Making during Public Health Emergencies: Ethical Considerations

right arrow Bernard Lo, MD, and Mitchell H. Katz, MD

4 October 2005 | Volume 143 Issue 7 | Pages 493-498

Recent public health emergencies involving anthrax, the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and shortages of influenza vaccine have dramatized the need for restrictive public health measures such as quarantine, isolation, and rationing. Front-line physicians will face ethical dilemmas during public health emergencies when patients disagree with these measures. Patients might request interventions that are not recommended or for which they are not eligible, or they might object to intrusive or restrictive measures. The physician's primary responsibility in such emergencies is to the public rather than to the individual patient. In public health emergencies, physicians need to address the patient's needs and concerns, recognize their changed roles, and work closely with public health officials. Physicians can still work on behalf of patients by advocating for changes in policies and exceptions when warranted and by mitigating the adverse consequences of public health measures. Before an emergency occurs, physicians should think through how they will respond to foreseeable dilemmas arising when patients disagree with public health recommendations.

Author and Article Information
space

From the University of California, San Francisco, and the San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, California.

Acknowledgments: The authors thank Patricia Zettler for her expert research assistance.

Grant Support: By the Greenwall Foundation.

Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest: None disclosed.

Requests for Single Reprints: Bernard Lo, MD, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, Room C 126, 521 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94143-0903; e-mail, bernie{at}medicine.ucsf.edu.

Current Author Addresses: Dr. Lo: Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, Room C 126, 521 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94143-0903.

Dr. Katz: San Francisco Department of Public Health, 101 Grove Street, Room 308, San Francisco, CA 94102.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Public HealthHome page
S. R. Benatar and R. E. G. Upshur
Dual Loyalty of Physicians in the Military and in Civilian Life
Am J Public Health, December 1, 2008; 98(12): 2161 - 2167.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Public HealthHome page
R. E. Malone, V. B. Yerger, C. McGruder, and E. Froelicher
"It's Like Tuskegee in Reverse": A Case Study of Ethical Tensions in Institutional Review Board Review of Community-Based Participatory Research
Am J Public Health, November 1, 2006; 96(11): 1914 - 1919.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online 

Copyright © 2005 by the American College of Physicians.