Advancing ethical scholarship in clinical practice, biomedical research, patient rights, and responsible healthcare governance.
Ethical questions arise wherever medical knowledge, professional judgment and human interests intersect. Decisions concerning treatment, scientific investigation, patient autonomy and the distribution of healthcare resources frequently involve competing responsibilities that cannot be resolved through clinical evidence alone. The Department of Medical Ethics of The Gazette of Medical Sciences (The GMS) provides a scholarly forum for examining these questions through ethical reasoning, critical analysis and interdisciplinary investigation. Its scope encompasses clinical ethics, biomedical research ethics, professional conduct, institutional responsibility and the moral dimensions of public health practice. Original research, critical reviews, case-based ethical analyses and well-supported perspectives are welcomed where they contribute meaningfully to the understanding of ethical problems in medicine and healthcare.
Respect for persons, informed consent, confidentiality, professional responsibility and the protection of vulnerable individuals are central concerns in clinical ethics. Yet their application often becomes complex when patients, families, healthcare professionals and institutions hold differing values or priorities. Questions involving treatment refusal, shared decision-making, end-of-life care, reproductive healthcare, organ transplantation, medical errors and conflicts of interest require careful consideration of ethical principles alongside clinical circumstances. The Department welcomes investigations that examine such dilemmas, evaluate competing moral arguments and consider how professional obligations can be fulfilled while respecting human dignity, patient rights and the responsibilities inherent in therapeutic relationships.
The ethical foundations of biomedical research constitute another essential dimension of the Department's work. The World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki provides an influential international framework for medical research involving human participants, including research involving identifiable human material and data. Within this broader ethical tradition, the Department considers questions of scientific validity, research participant protection, risk-benefit assessment, voluntary consent, independent ethical review, equitable participant selection and responsible management of research information. Particular attention is given to the functions of research ethics committees and institutional review boards, as well as the ethical responsibilities of investigators, sponsors, research institutions and publishers. Scientific misconduct, selective reporting, authorship disputes and failures of transparency are also appropriate subjects for critical scholarly examination.
Medical ethics extends beyond individual clinical encounters and research protocols into the organization of healthcare and the relationship between medicine and society. Decisions concerning healthcare access, resource allocation, public health interventions, professional regulation and institutional governance raise fundamental questions about fairness, accountability, proportionality and the public interest. The Department welcomes scholarship addressing healthcare inequities, public health emergencies, professional independence, commercial influences on medical practice, global health responsibilities and the protection of individual rights within collective health programmes. Philosophical, legal, sociological and policy-oriented approaches are particularly valuable when they illuminate tensions between individual freedoms, professional duties and societal obligations.
Developments in artificial intelligence, genomic medicine, digital health, biotechnology and data-intensive research continue to reshape the ethical landscape of medical science. These advances invite scrutiny of algorithmic fairness, informed consent for secondary data use, genetic privacy, technological accountability and the boundaries of professional responsibility. The Department encourages contributions that engage critically with both established ethical frameworks and emerging challenges, without presuming that complex moral questions have universally accepted answers. Submissions should identify their ethical premises, engage fairly with relevant evidence and opposing arguments, distinguish normative judgments from empirical findings and acknowledge the limitations of their conclusions. The objective is to cultivate rigorous, respectful and intellectually independent discussion that can inform ethical practice, biomedical research and healthcare governance.
This article explains two core physician competencies required for licensure, and the recent widespread failure of physicians to provide safe medical care for the communities which they serve.
View / Download Article ↗Beyond questions of fraud and corruption it has stimulated debate as to whether the government overstepped its bounds and infringed on the rights of its citizens. Certainly, the active suppression of alternative perspectives regarding handling of the pandemic raises First Amendment questions. The pandemic response was a watershed moment in American democracy and should raise concerns as to whether it heralds the rise of a new form of totalitarianism.
View / Download Article ↗Over the past decade experts repeatedly warned it was but a matter of time before the next pandemic struck. They urged governmental agencies to prepare strategies to diminish its potential impact. When SARS-CoV-2 finally emerged in late January, 2020 the government was paralyzed and unable to take effective action.
View / Download Article ↗In this three-part series we examine the extent to which disaster capitalism and the medical-industrial complex turned the pandemic into a ‘golden’ opportunity to enhance corporate profits which took place, in large part, at the taxpayer’s expense through appropriation of public resources. In the first part we examine the rise of this predatory social ideology and the strategies its adherents have employed to assure its success
View / Download Article ↗The purpose of this study is: first, to review disciplinary threats made to healthcare professionals by their governing bodies in the US; and second, to review medical literature for complications related to the COVID-19 vaccines and data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), particularly those related to pregnant women and women of reproductive age.
View / Download Article ↗Please direct any enquiries or submit papers to: info@thegms.co
