This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Oscar W. Clarke, MD; Robert B. Conley, MD, JD

JAMA. 1991;266(20):2876-2877.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The American Medical Association's (AMA) Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs has stated, "[A] physician may not ethically refuse to treat a patient whose condition is within the physician's current realm of competence solely because the patient is seropositive [for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)]."² This position articulates the medical profession's long-established tradition of treating those in need without regard to the risks that treatment may present to the physician. The statement is also grounded in the fact that while the AMA'S Principles of Medical Ethics recognize that physicians have freedom to choose whom to serve, the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs has never interpreted this principle to endorse "illegal or invidious discrimination. "² Any discrimination that emanates from members of the medical profession is particularly objectionable because of medicine's professed commitment to moral ideals. Indeed, that physicians regard themselves as professionals testifies to their pursuit of ethical objectives. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (Dr Clarke) and the Office of General Counsel (Dr Conley), American Medical Association, Chicago, Ill.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to Office of General Counsel, American Medical Association, 515 N State St, Chicago, IL 60610 (Dr Conley).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?