A tension between emotional concern and professional detachment was pervasive among medical students undergoing their first experience of the death of a patient in their care. How this tension was negotiated depended on the patient's clinical circumstances, supervisor role-modelling and, most importantly, the support of supervisors and peers, including debriefing opportunities. Faculty members and residents should be made aware of the complexities of a medical student's first experience of patient death and be educated regarding sympathetic debriefing.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundNon-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) is a technology which provides information about fetal genetic characteristics (including sex) very early in pregnancy by examining fetal DNA obtained from a sample of maternal blood. NIPT is a morally complex technology that has advanced quickly to market with a strong push from industry developers, leaving many areas of uncertainty still to be resolved, and creating a strong need for health policy that reflects women’s social and ethical values. We approach the need for ethical policy-making by studying the use of NIPT and emerging policy in the province of Ontario, Canada.MethodsUsing an adapted version of constructivist grounded theory, we conducted interviews with 38 women who have had personal experiences with NIPT. We used an iterative process of data collection and analysis and a staged coding strategy to conduct a descriptive analysis of ethics issues identified implicitly and explicitly by women who have been affected by this technology.ResultsThe findings of this paper focus on current ethical issues for women seeking NIPT, including place in the prenatal pathway, health care provider counselling about the test, industry influence on the diffusion of NIPT, consequences of availability of test results. Other issues gain relevance in the context of future policy decisions regarding NIPT, including funding of NIPT and principles that may govern the expansion of the scope of NIPT. These findings are not an exhaustive list of all the potential ethical issues related to NIPT, but rather a representation of the issues which concern women who have personal experience with this test.ConclusionsWomen who have had personal experience with NIPT have concerns and priorities which sometimes contrast dramatically with the theoretical ethics literature. These findings suggest the importance of engaging patients in ethical deliberation about morally complex technologies, and point to the need for more deliberative patient engagement work in this area.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-018-0267-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Limited clinical research with pregnant women has resulted in insufficient data to promote evidence-informed prenatal care. Charmaz's constructivist grounded theory methodology was used to explore how research with pregnant women would be determined ethically acceptable from the perspectives of pregnant women, health care providers, and researchers in reproductive sciences. Semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 12 pregnant women, 10 health care providers, and nine reproductive science researchers. All three groups suggested the importance of informed consent and that permissible risk would be very limited and complex, being dependent on the personal benefits and risks of each particular study. Pregnant women, clinicians, and researchers shared concerns about the well-being of the woman and her fetus, and expressed a dilemma between promoting research for evidence-informed prenatal care while securing the safety in the course of research participation.

No abstract

Clinical clerks' experiences of ethical dilemmas might be mitigated if residency education and professional development mirrored the increase in preclinical ethics education, if ethics training included encouraging students to discuss ethical issues as they arise, and if educators developed innovative models of student evaluation.

No abstract