Ethical Requirements of the Physician Depending on Their Assessment of the Scientific Evidence Supporting or Dissuading Medical Marijuana for a Particular Condition and if They Have a Personal Moral Commitment Opposed to Attest or Recommend Medical Marijuana Use
| A Four-Box Approach to a Physician's Ethical Obligations | ||
|---|---|---|
| Willingness to attest/recommend | Science | |
| Benefit | No Benefit | |
| Box A | Box B | |
| Yes | Analogous to the physician's evidence-based decision to prescribe any other medication | Analogous to requests for experimental treatments or homeopathic remedies |
| Same ethical obligations: obtain informed consent by educating the patient about potential risks, benefits, and burdens of | If science is ambiguous, the physician has additional ethical obligations beyond educating the patient on same topics required for informed consent | |
| • The prescribed treatment | • Educate the patient about why there is a lack of evidence which may create increased risk | |
| • Other treatment options | ||
| • Declining treatment | If the harms seem to clearly outweigh the potential benefit, physician may decline to assist the patient | |
| • Assistance would be medically inappropriate | ||
| Box C | Box D | |
| No | Ethical obligation to be transparent with the patient | Ethical obligation to be transparent with the patient |
| May have an obligation to refer the patient to a provider who does not have a moral objection to assisting | Inform the patient of both reasons for decision to decline assistance | |
| • Institutional/personal objections to assisting | ||
| • Lack of scientific evidence supporting potential benefit | ||