George J. Annas – författare

The Nazi atrocities committed by researchers and physicians during the Second World War prompted the development of the Nuremberg Code to guide the ethics of modern medical experimentation utilizing voluntary human subjects. Since its inception, the Code has been viewed as one of the cornerstones of modern bioethical thought. This book examines the nature, scope and proper place of the Nuremberg Code in medical research. The ramifications of this important document are thoroughly discussed by a distinguished group of contemporary professionals from the fields of both medicine and law. The historical setting of the Code's creation, some modern parallels, and the current attitude of German physicians toward the crimes of the Nazi era, are discussed in early chapters. The book progresses to a powerful account of the Doctors' Trial at Nuremberg, its resulting verdict, and the Code's development. The Code's contemporary influence on both American and international law is examined in its historical context and discussed in terms of its universality: are the foundational ethics of the Code as valid today as when it was originally formed? The editors conclude with a chapter on foreseeable future developments.

Bioethics was "born in the USA" and the values American bioethics embrace are based on American law, including liberty and justice. This book crosses the borders between bioethics and law, but moves beyond the domestic law/bioethics struggles for dominance by exploring attempts to articulate universal principles based on international human rights. The isolationism of bioethics in the US is not tenable in the wake of scientific triumphs like decoding the human genome, and civilizational tragedies like international terrorism. Annas argues that by crossing boundaries which have artificially separated bioethics and health law from the international human rights movement, American bioethics can be reborn as a global force for good, instead of serving mainly the purposes of U.S. academics. This thesis is explored in a variety of international contexts such as terrorism and genetic engineering, and in U.S. domestic disputes such as patient rights and market medicine. The citizens of the world have created two universal codes: science has sequenced the human genome and the United Nations has produced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The challenge for American bioethics is to combine these two great codes in imaginative and constructive ways to make the world a better, and healthier, place to live.

"Carefully reasoned, clearly articulated, and pulls no punches...Boldly tackles the most contentious issues in bioethics and public policy....Worst Case Bioethics is certain to provoke strong responses across disciplines and ideologies on issues of great importance."- Mark Rothstein, Journal of Legal Medicine"Annas persuasively argues in Worst Case Bioethics that basing policy on extreme nightmare possibilities leads to a distortion of fundamental ethical principles and legal protections." - Arthur L. Caplan, The Lancet"Worst Case Bioethics offers a valuable consideration of how public health policy is sometimes shaped by fear in a counterproductive manner. The book is well-written, well-reasoned, and persuasive." - Thomas May, Science

The third edition of the fully documented exposition of explanation of health care patient rights from birth to deathNow in its third edition, The Rights of Patients offers fully documented exposition and explanation of the rights of patients from birth to death. This concise reference covers topics such as informed consent, emergency treatment, refusing treatment, human experimentation, privacy and confidentiality, patient safety, and medical malpractice.The Rights of Patients is an invaluable resource not only for patients and their families but also for physicians, hospital administrators, medical and nursing students, and other health care workers.

In the early 1970s, well before the field ofbioethics had established itself in medicine or anywhere else, the Hastings Center organized a small meeting of law school professors. The question we put to them was: what could or should be done to stimulate legal interest in the field? The answer we got was a wise one. We should do nothing to forcefeed the interest. It should simply be allowed to develop on its own, by the ordinary route of attracting a following because of its inherent importance. That is just what happened, and one of the first young legal scholars drawn to what remains (oddly enough) a relatively small field was George Annas. The idea of a column on law and ethics for the Hastings Center Report was not by 1976 a particularly bold one. It had been clear to us from the outset of the Center in 1969, and the establishment of the Report in 1971, that the rapidly emerging moral problems in medicine and biology would have enormous legal and policy implications. Even so, we were hardly prepared for the large and steady number of cases that were to come before the courts during the 1970s and that were to continue unabated in the 1980s. But our concern about a column on the subject was of a more pedestrian kind.

George Annas, America's leading proponent of patient rights, spells them out for you in this revised, up-to-date edition of his groundbreaking classic. Thorough, comprehensive, and easy to follow - using a question-and-answer format in much of the text - The Rights of Patients explores all aspects of becoming an informed patient: hospital organization hospital rules emergency treatment admission and discharge the patient rights movement informed consent surgery obstetrical care human experimentation and research privacy and confidentiality care of the dying death, autopsy, and organ donation medical malpractice.

In the early 1970s, well before the field ofbioethics had established itself in medicine or anywhere else, the Hastings Center organized a small meeting of law school professors. The question we put to them was: what could or should be done to stimulate legal interest in the field? The answer we got was a wise one. We should do nothing to forcefeed the interest. It should simply be allowed to develop on its own, by the ordinary route of attracting a following because of its inherent importance. That is just what happened, and one of the first young legal scholars drawn to what remains (oddly enough) a relatively small field was George Annas. The idea of a column on law and ethics for the Hastings Center Report was not by 1976 a particularly bold one. It had been clear to us from the outset of the Center in 1969, and the establishment of the Report in 1971, that the rapidly emerging moral problems in medicine and biology would have enormous legal and policy implications. Even so, we were hardly prepared for the large and steady number of cases that were to come before the courts during the 1970s and that were to continue unabated in the 1980s. But our concern about a column on the subject was of a more pedestrian kind.