In this paper we discuss whether effective public health interventions and policies are environmentally sustainable. First, we suggest that the environmental impact from public health interventions and policies should be considered in the perspective of a human lifecycle. Second, we spell out in greater detail what we take it to mean for a public health intervention or policy to be environmentally sustainable. Third, environmental sustainability regards not only environmental impact, but also shares of our environmental “budgets”, also referred to as environmentally safe operating spaces. Such budgets represent the limits of the sustainability of a group of individuals, e.g. a population. Each individual is assigned a share of the budget for each category of environmental impact, which represents how much the individual may impact the environmental category in question without doing so unsustainably. We discuss whether individuals ought to have a larger share of these budgets as a function of their ongoing life as this would make a better case for thinking that public health interventions and policies are environmentally sustainable. But we argue that this is incompatible with maximizing health within our environmental budgets and therefore mistaken. Instead, individuals ought to be ascribed a share of these budgets for life, a share that does not increase as individuals get older. We conclude that while some public health interventions and policies might be environmentally sustainable, we cannot merely assume that public health and sustainability are win-win; indeed, we have positive reason to think that some interventions and policies are not environmentally sustainable. Finally, we elaborate on how we ought to think about and react to this conclusion.

In Great Britain, abortion has long proven to be contentious in the context of policy making, with it remaining a criminal offence. Despite progress over the last decade to permit home use of abortion medications and remote consultation, we have seen prosecutions in recent years. Regulatory frameworks such as this have been framed as ‘abortion exceptionalism’, such that termination of pregnancy is far more tightly regulated than comparable healthcare. One example of this exceptionalism is the strict abortion reporting requirements found in Great Britain. Per these requirements, any doctor providing abortion care must notify the relevant Chief Medical Officer or Public Health Scotland of each and every termination, including a startling amount of information about the patient. The extent of these requirements raises serious questions in relation to patient confidentiality and is, I suggest, an outlier in these terms. Further, it is questionable whether such reporting can be in any way said to be in the public interest. I begin by outlining the Abortion Regulations 1991, which apply in England and Wales, before considering the updated Scottish approach brought about by the Abortion (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2021. I then move to examine the abortion reporting requirements against our general conception of patient confidentiality, highlighting the discordance. I ultimately argue that the requirements are not adequately justified and represent yet another, often forgotten, example of abortion exceptionalism in Great Britain. Thus, I suggest that all three nations that comprise Great Britain ought to further revise their approach to abortion data.

An emerging approach to complement randomised controlled trial (RCT) data in the development of radiotherapy treatments is to use routinely collected ‘real-world’ data (RWD). RWD is the data collected as standard-of-care about all patients during their usual cancer care pathway. Given the nature of this data, important questions remain about the permissibility and acceptability of using RWD in routine practice. We involved and engaged with patients, carers and the public in a two-day citizens’ jury to understand their views and obtain decisions regarding two key issues: (1) preferred approaches to consent for the use of RWD within the context of patients receiving radiotherapy for lung cancer in RAPID-RT and (2) how RWD use should be best communicated to patients. Individual views were polled using questionnaires at various stages of the jury, whilst group discussion activities prompted further dialogue about the rationale behind choices of consent. Key decisions obtained from the jury include: (1) an opt-out approach to consent for the use of RWD; (2) the opt-out approach to consent should be informed. Furthermore, it was advised that information and communication regarding the consent process and use of RWD should be accessible, clear and available in a variety of formats. It is important that the consent process for patient data use is underpinned by principles of autonomy and transparency with clear channels of communication between those asking for and giving consent. Moreover, the process of seeking consent from patients should be proportionate to the risks presented from their participation.

Abstract In many western countries informal care is conceived as the answer to the increasing care demand. Little is known how formal and informal caregivers collaborate in the context of an diverse ageing population. The aim of this study was to gain insight in how professionals’ perspectives regarding the collaboration with informal carers with a migration background are framed and shaped by intersecting aspects of diversity. We used an intersectionality informed qualitative design with informal conversations (N = 12) and semi-structured interviews (N = 17) with healthcare professionals working with clients with Acquired Brain Injury. Two critical friends were involved in the analysis which was substantiated by a participatory analysis with a community of practice. We identified four interrelated themes: (a) ‘The difficult Other’ in which professionals reflected on carers with a migration background causing ‘difficulties’; (b) ‘The dependent Other’ refers to professionals’ realization that ‘difficulties’ are intensified by the context in which care takes place; (c) in ‘The uncomfortable self’ professionals describe how feelings of insecurities evoked by the Other are associated with an inability to act ‘professionally’, and; (d) ‘The reflexive self’ shows how some professionals reflect on their own identities and identify their blind spots in collaboration within a care network. These themes demonstrate the tensions, biases and power imbalances between carers and professionals, which may explain some of the existing health disparities perpetuated through care networks.

Compliance and regulatory bodies often encourage health care providers’ disclosure of and apologies for wrongdoing. Patients may perceive that forgiveness is expected and feel pressure to grant it. However, forgiveness carries consequences, which can bring limits to forgiveness. Understanding these limits is crucial for understanding when forgiveness can either heal or add to trauma. This paper explores 10 context-dependent limits to forgiveness across four categories. The first category outlines conceptual limits: not all harm requires forgiveness, some evil acts may be beyond human forgiveness, and blame can be incompatible with forgiveness. Secondly, moral and ethical limits result from how accountability strains forgiveness, how moral absolutism can hinder it, and how proxy forgiveness may lack moral legitimacy. The third category identifies relational and social limits. Forced reconciliation can undermine forgiveness. System negligence diffuses culpability, hindering individual forgiveness, and requires prioritizing the victim’s healing and benefit despite the diluted accountability. Finally, the fourth category highlights temporal and process-related limits. It emphasizes that ongoing or unaddressed harm can obstruct forgiveness, while variations in healing trajectories may delay or complicate it. Updating current understanding, this framework adds insight into when forgiveness may be inappropriate. It offers providers ethical guidance in navigating this terrain through a person-centred approach balancing empathy and accountability. The framework aims to facilitate healing for the patient and provider, regardless of whether forgiveness occurs.

The ongoing war in Ukraine, which began in 2022, has displaced millions of people, creating immense challenges for healthcare systems in refugee-receiving countries. While temporary protection aims to grant refugees access to medical care, significant structural barriers and ethical shortcomings exist in refugee healthcare. To meet this challenge, the authors propose considering the integration of displaced physicians into the medical care systems of host countries. This solution not only meets the immediate healthcare demands but also leverages the expertise of Ukrainian doctors. The implementation in Germany and Poland exemplifies the current heterogeneity of regulations governing the professional practice of Ukrainian physicians, with individual workarounds such as the possibility of treating fellow Ukrainians while waiting for the approval of the license. From an ethical perspective, the dilemma between the urgent need for additional physicians and ensuring patient safety by thoroughly assessing all doctors’ qualifications is a critical concern. Considering all the analyzed aspects, the authors advocate for harmonizing the regulations across the EU and removing barriers that limit healthcare access for refugees. They further stress the importance of developing comprehensive long-term strategies to ensure sustained healthcare access for Ukrainian refugees.

About one-third of Australians use the services of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM); but debate about the role of CAM in public healthcare is vociferous. Despite this, the mechanisms driving CAM healthcare choices are not well understood, especially in rural Australia. From 2016 to 2018, 2,679 persons from the Goulburn Valley, northern Victoria, were surveyed, 28% (755) of whom reporting visiting CAM practitioners. A Generalized Linear Mixed Model was used to assess associations between various socio-demographic variables and the use of CAM services. The strongest significant inverse (p < 0.05) association with CAM use overall was being unemployed, with markedly lower odds of using CAM than those employed full-time (OR 0.22 [0.12, 0.41]). The next strongest inverse relationship was being retired (OR 0.44 [0.30, 0.65]). The strongest positive associations were with English spoken at home (OR 2.38 [1.34, 4.24]), private health insurance (hospital cover) (1.57 [1.28, 1.91]), being Australian born (OR 1.61 [1.14, 2.28]), and female sex (1.25 [1.02, 1.52])). Females had significantly higher odds of using osteopathy than males (OR 1.98 [1.33, 2.96]) but there were no significant sex differences for chiropractic or massage. This is the first such study conducted solely for a rural Australian population. The drivers of CAM use differed from previous nation-wide studies and they varied across modalities. The factors identified here as being associated with CAM use could be used by CAM practitioners in developing person-centred services. Similarly, the findings are relevant to primary-care services in understanding what sectors of society might eschew conventional health care for CAM in rural regions, where health services are often limited.

In October 2024, Türkiye was shocked by the “Newborn Gang” scandal, in which a network of healthcare professionals allegedly exploited newborns for financial gain in private hospitals. The accused are charged with intentionally neglecting, mistreating or even killing of healthy infants in neonatal intensive care units to prolong their stays and maximize government reimbursements. This paper critically examines the structural and ethical failures exposed by the 2024 “Newborn Gang” scandal in Türkiye, in which healthcare professionals in private hospitals allegedly allowed or caused the deaths of newborns to profit from the state’s healthcare reimbursement system. Drawing on the frameworks of neoliberal critique and medical humanities, the study argues that such extreme violations are not isolated incidents of individual misconduct, but manifestations of deeper systemic vulnerabilities fostered by the neoliberalization of healthcare. It explores how deregulation, market incentives, and the erosion of ethical values—exacerbated by Türkiye’s Health Transformation Program—have created an environment where financial gain is prioritized over patient welfare. Comparative case studies are employed to contextualize these findings within broader global patterns of ethical collapse in healthcare systems influenced by market logic. The paper contends that merely strengthening oversight is insufficient; rather, a structural reorientation is needed. As a potential alternative, the study introduces Value-Based Healthcare as a model that aligns clinical outcomes with ethical imperatives. Ultimately, the paper calls for a fundamental moral recalibration of healthcare—one that affirms care, integrity, and justice as core values over profit and efficiency.

Medicine has always existed in a marketplace, and there have been extensive discussions about the ethical implications of commerce in health care. For the most part, this discussion has focused on health professionals’ interactions with pharmaceutical and other health technology industries, with less attention given to other types of commercial influences, such as corporatized health services and fee-for-service practice. This is a significant lacuna because in many jurisdictions, some or all of healthcare is delivered in the private sector. Using the exemplar of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), this paper asks: what, if any, responsibilities do doctors have to challenge the distorting influence of commerce in healthcare, other than those arising from their own interactions with health technology companies? ART provides a good focus for this question because it is an area of practice that has historically been provided in the private sector. First, we describe a range of concepts that offer helpful heuristics for capturing how and when doctors can reasonably be said to have responsibilities to resist commercial distortion, including: complicity, acquiescence, wilful ignorance, non-wilful ignorance, and duplicity. Second, we present ways that individual doctors can act to stop questionable behaviour on the part of their colleagues, clinics/corporations, and their profession. Third, we note that there are many situations where change cannot be achieved by individuals acting alone, and so we consider the responsibilities of health professionals as collectives as well as the role that professional bodies and regulators should play.

Community-based interventions (CBIs) show promise as effective and cost-effective obesity prevention initiatives. CBIs are typically complex interventions, including multiple settings, strategies and stakeholders. Cost-effectiveness evidence, however, generally only considers a narrow range of costs and benefits associated with anthropometric outcomes. While it is recognised that the complexity of CBIs may result in broader non-health societal and community benefits, the identification, measurement, and quantification of these outcomes is limited. This study aimed to understand the perspectives of stakeholders on the broader benefits of CBIs and their measurement, as well as perceptions of CBI cost-effectiveness. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from three stakeholder groups (lead researchers, funders, and community stakeholders of CBIs). Online semi-structured interviews were conducted, taking a constructivist approach. Coding, theme development and analysis were based on published guidance for thematic analysis. Twenty-six stakeholders participated in the interviews (12 lead researchers; 7 funders; 6 community stakeholders). Six key themes emerged; (1) Impacts of CBIs (health impacts and broader impacts); (2) Broader benefits were important to stakeholders; (3) Measurement of benefits are challenging; (4) CBIs were considered cost-effective; (5) Framing CBIs for community engagement (6) Making equitable impacts and sustaining changes—successes and challenges. Across all stakeholders, broader benefits, particularly the establishment of networks and partnerships within communities, were seen as important outcomes of CBIs. Participants viewed the CBI approach to obesity prevention as cost-effective, however, there were challenges in measuring, quantifying and valuing broader benefits. Development of tools to measure and quantify broader benefits would allow for more comprehensive evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of CBIs for obesity prevention.