Topic: ICU tracheostomy decisions the lens of professor Yates’ 10 cardinal issues in good decision making that is well respected in non-medical settings
Page not found
The Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences at Michigan State University has posted information about its 2011-12 Brown Bag/Webinar Series. All sessions take place 12-1 pm in C-102 East Fee Hall on the East Lansing campus. Sessions for the fall include:
September 7: Helen Veit, PhD, "The ethics of aging in an age of youth: Rising life expectancy in the early twentieth century United States"
October 19: Scott Kim, MD, PhD, "Democratic deliberation about surrogate consent for dementia research"
November 10: Stuart J. Youngner, MD, "Regulated euthanasia in the Netherlands: Is it working?"
December 7: Karen Meagher, PhD candidate, "Trustworthiness in public health practice"
See www.bioethics.msu.edu/ for more information.
Funded by National Science Foundation.
Funding Years: 2013-2016
The goal of this supplemental proposal is to conduct preproduction activities that will allow the successful and efficient collection of the PSID data in 2013. Specifically, the aims are to 1) conduct scientific review and development of the 2013 instrument, 2) program and test the new instrument, including the fielding of a pretest, 3) develop respondent contact materials, including a contact information update request, and other pre-interview informational materials, 4) conduct an interviewer training for the 2013 field effort, including the development of training materials and content that will lead to interviewer certification.
PI(s): Charles Brown
Co-I(s): Mick Couper, Katherine McGonagle
Imagine that you have just been diagnosed with high cholesterol. You are asked to decide whether or not take a type of drug called a statin to lower your cholesterol. In order to help you decide, you are given information about the risk and benefits of taking statins.
On the following page, consider 4 different formats for presenting the risks and benefits.
What do subjects need to know in order to agree to participate in research? An informed consent document is assumed to communicate the essential information, but it is not clear how carefully research participants read these documents.
Traditional ethical teaching suggests that a physician's assessment of a patient's best interest should guide the decision of whether to administer emergency life-sustaining therapy, absent guidance by the patient or family members. In pediatric medicine, physicians may insist on life-saving therapy if they believe it is in a child's best interest to receive it, even if the parents seek to refuse it. It is unclear exactly how physicians make such assessments, however, and whether/how these assessments influence decision-making in critical situations. Consider the following scenario:
The government requires that potential kidney transplant recipients be informed if an organ donor engaged in CDC categorized "high risk" behaviors. Are these "high risk" donor kidneys associated with worse survival rates following transplantation? Does this label "high risk" result in usable kidneys being discarded?