BackgroundIn our time there is growing interest in developing a systematic approach to oncologic patients and end-of-life care. An important goal within this domain is to identify the values and ethical norms that guide physicians’ decisions and their recourse to technological aids to preserve life. Though crucial, this objective is not easy to achieve.The purpose of this study is to evaluate empirically the real-life bioethical dilemmas with which palliative physicians are confronted when treating terminal cancer patients.MethodsA quasi-experimental, observational, comparative, prospective and mixed (qualitative and quantitative) study was conducted in order to analyse the correlation between the palliative doctor-patient relationship and ethical judgments regarding everyday bioethical dilemmas that arise in palliative clinical practice. The values at stake in decision-making on a daily basis were also explored.From February 2012 to march 2014, palliative healthcare personnel were invited to participate in a research project on axiology of clinical practice in palliative medicine. Each participant answered to a set of survey instruments focusing on ethical dilemmas, views, and representations of clinical practice.For this analysis we selected a convenience sample of 30 physicians specialized in pain medicine and palliative care (algologists and palliativists), with two or more years of experience with oncologic patients and end-of-life care.Results113 dilemmas were obtained, the most frequent of which were those regarding sedation, home administration of opioids, and institutional regulations. We observed that the ethical nucleus of palliative medicine is truth-telling, implying bidirectional trust between patients and healthcare providers. The two most prominent virtues among the participants in our study were justice and professional humility. The outstanding roles of the physician in palliative medicine are as educator and as adviser, followed by that of provider of medical assistance.ConclusionsThis investigation opens up new horizons in a career path where professional wearing is rampant. The rediscovery of values and virtues in palliative clinical practice will renew and replenish the motivation of healthcare providers who carry out these duties, giving them a new professional and personal perspective of growth.

The decisions of parents to forego vaccines "mandatory" for their children generate in physician and pediatricians some dilemmas and issues such as what to do when parents do not authorize administration of vaccines to their children? Do parents place their children at risk severe enough to notify governmental child protection services and treat this as parental negligence? What to do in the situation where the parental decision to forego immunization of their children affects others? The best interests of the child include ensuring the child's benefit over any other situation. Related to this, parents against vaccines have arguments to justify their position that physicians cannot force parents to immunize their children. By the same principle, physicians must ensure the welfare of children and remain alert, respecting that parental decisions do not exceed the threshold of "no harm to the child" and only if the parental decision in regard to foregoing vaccination places the child at risk of serious harm is government intervention justified. This resource should be left as the last resort because most conflicts must be resolved within the relationship of the physicians with the parents.

y había incorporado los laboratorios de programas preventivos como el de citología exfoliativa y los de diagnóstico de rabia, paludismo, tuberculosis; posteriormente incorporaría otras redes que surgieron como parte de la respuesta a brotes epidémicos y al nuevo panorama epidemiológico. En este periodo, 27 algoritmos diagnósticos se definieron y organizaron en 18 redes, algunas de las cuales comenzaron a colaborar con redes globales. En 2001, en el Instituto se empezó a trabajar con patógenos relacionados con el bioterrorismo. Para entonces, las restricciones del edificio sede fueron evidentes; en 2008, se decidió construir nuevas instalaciones. El Instituto y sus redes diagnósticas constituyen un hito en la salud pública latinoamericana del siglo XXI.

El periodo que comienza en 1940 es crucial para la creación del moderno sistema de salud de México. El Instituto de Salubridad y Enfermedades Tropicales es la institución pionera en investigación en salud y en sus primeras dos décadas logra madurez y consolida líneas de investigación expresadas en casi 1700 publicaciones. También obtiene notoria visibilidad internacional y fue seleccionado como referencia regional para la vigilancia epidemiológica de influenza, estreptococo y salmonela. Su evolución se produjo con ritmo de innovación que iría disminuyendo para el final de ese periodo. Enfrentó limitaciones para renovar líneas de trabajo, investigadores y equipo de laboratorio, sin embargo, su papel en las decisiones de la salud pública del país siguió siendo central.