Practitioners are mandated to electronically prescribe both controlled and non-controlled substances effective March 27, 2016.However, there are a number of exceptions in which a practitioner may issue an Official New York State prescription (ONYSRx) form, oral prescription or a fax of an ONYSRx.In 2002, a Consortium of the American Board of Internal Medicine, The American College of Physicians, and The American Society of Internal Medicine partnered with the European Federation of Internal Medicine and developed a new Charter for Professionalism.And, while they emphasized the three fundamental principles—patient welfare, autonomy, and social justice—the authors noted that in any contract between medicine and society, physicians should provide expert advice to society on matters of health and public safety.Similarly, when universal laws were repealed in favor of partial laws, Florida saw its compliance drop from 99 percent to 53 percent, and in Louisiana compliance went from 100 percent down to 52 percent.Furthermore, the NHTSA found that in states with laws requiring only minors to wear helmets, less than 40 percent of underage riders who were fatally injured wore a helmet, indicating that despite a law requiring helmet use it is difficult to determine whether a rider is underage, thereby hampering enforcement.For example, commenting on the mandatory helmet law debate, A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments (ABATE) has said it does not “advocate that you ride without a helmet when the law is repealed, only that you have the right to decide.” Of course, these autonomous decision-making rights are not absolute, and may be limited when the choice of an individual unfairly burdens others or puts them at significant risk.
Considerations of how one’s actions may affect others, justice claims, are often analyzed within a public health framework.
Groups such as the American Motorcycle Association argue that “mandatory helmet laws do nothing to prevent crashes,” and are an inappropriate method of increasing safety and public awareness.
Although the prevention and reduction of injury are a primary focus of helmet use, the motorcycle helmet law debate typically raises ethical issues that extend beyond the more immediate and intended purpose of protecting the head of the rider.
Those individuals who act autonomously base their actions on their own values and plans.
The right to act autonomously finds support and protection in both U. law and basic principles of Western bioethics, and is manifest in Justice Benjamin Cardozo’s statement that “every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body; and a surgeon who performs an operation without his patient’s consent commits an assault, for which he is liable.” It is important to note that Justice Cardozo did not comment on the quality of the decision itself—that is, whether it is a “good” decision or a “bad” decision—but on the individual’s right to make it for him or herself.