Ethical issues in the access to emergency care for undocumented immigrants.

Patients who are undocumented immigrants (UIs) frequently present to emergency departments in the United States, especially in communities with large immigrant populations. Emergency physicians confront important ethical issues when providing care for these patients. This article examines those ethical issues and recommends best practices in emergency care for UIs. After a brief introduction and description of the UI population, the article proposes central principles of emergency medical ethics as a framework for emergency physician decisions and actions. It then considers the role of law and public policy in health care for UIs, including the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and current practices of the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The article concludes with discussion of the scope of emergency physician practice and with recommendations regarding best practices in ED care for UIs.

A Journal of the COVID-19 (Plague) Year.

The essays in this special issue of HEC Forum provide reflections that make explicit the implicit anthropology that our current pandemic has brought but which in the medical ethics literature around COVID-19 has to a great extent ignored. Three of the essays are clearly "journalistic" as a literary genre: one by a hospital chaplain, one by a medical student in her pre-clinical years, and one by a fourth-year medical student who reports her experience as she completed her undergraduate clerkships and applied for positions in graduate medical education. Other essays explore the pandemic from historical, sociological, and economic perspectives, particularly how triage policies have been found to be largely blind to structural healthcare disparities, while simultaneously unable to appropriately address those disparities. Central issues that need to be addressed in triage are not just whether a utilitarian response is the most just response, but what exactly is the greatest good for the greatest number? Together, the essays in this special issue of HEC Forum create a call for a more anthropological approach to understanding health and healthcare. The narrow approach of viewing health as resulting primarily from healthcare will continue to hinder advances and perpetuate disparities. Health outcomes result from a complex interaction of various social, economic, cultural, historical, and political factors. Advancing healthcare requires contextualizing the health of populations amongst these factors. The COVID-19 pandemic has made us keenly aware of how interdependent our health as a society can be.

Utilitarian Principlism as a Framework for Crisis Healthcare Ethics.

This paper introduces the model of Utilitarian Principlism as a framework for crisis healthcare ethics. In modern Western medicine, during non-crisis times, principlism provides the four guiding principles in biomedical ethics-autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice; autonomy typically emerges as the decisive principle. The physician-patient relationship is a deontological construct in which the physician's primary duty is to the individual patient and the individual patient is paramount. For this reason, we term the non-crisis ethical framework that guides modern medicine Deontological Principlism. During times of crisis, resources become scarce, standards of care become dynamic, and public health ethics move to the forefront. Healthcare providers are forced to work in non-ideal conditions, and interactions with individual patients must be considered in the context of the crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced healthcare to shift to a more utilitarian framework with a greater focus on promoting the health of communities and populations. This paper puts forth the notion of Utilitarian Principlism as a framework for crisis healthcare ethics. We discuss each of the four principles from a utilitarian perspective and use clinical vignettes, based on real cases from the COVID-19 pandemic, for illustrative purposes. We explore how Deontological Principlism and Utilitarian Principlism are two ends of a spectrum, and the implications to healthcare as we emerge from the pandemic.

Post-traumatic stress and stress disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic: Survey of emergency physicians.

OBJECTIVE: Emergency physicians routinely encounter stressful clinical situations, including treating victims of crime, violence, and trauma; facing the deaths of patients; and delivering bad news. During a pandemic, stress may be increased for healthcare workers. This study was undertaken to identify symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among emergency physicians during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was developed using the Life Events Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition: DSM-5 (DSM-5) and the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). The survey was distributed to members of the American College of Emergency Physicians from May 21, 2020, through June 22, 2020. RESULTS: Among 1300 emergency physicians, a significant number of participants (22.3%; 95% confidence interval, 20.3-24.3%) reported symptoms of stress consistent with PTSD (PCL score ≥ 33). Higher PCL-5 scores were associated with age younger than 50 years (P < 0.05) and <10 years in practice (P < 0.05). The major sources of stress identified by participants included disinformation about COVID-19, computer work/electronic medical record, personal protective equipment concerns, and workload. The most common consequences of workplace stress were feeling distant or cut off from other people and sleep disturbance, such as trouble falling or staying asleep. CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of emergency physicians reported symptoms of stress consistent with PTSD. Higher PCL-5 scores were associated with age younger than 50 years and <10 years in practice.