In Memoriam: The Sudden Demise of the AMA Journal of Ethics — A great loss for physicians, the profession, and the public; MedPage Today, November 14, 2025

Matthew Wynia, MD, MPH, and Kayhan Parsi, JD, PhD, MedPage Today; In Memoriam: The Sudden Demise of the AMA Journal of Ethics — A great loss for physicians, the profession, and the public

"Bioethics is a small field, but we punch above our weight when it comes to writing. Professional journal articles, reports, and policies are arguably our primary written products, since the main job in bioethics is to help clinicians and others navigate ethical challenges in their work. But we also write for the public, in forums like blogs and editorials, since many of the issues we write about have broader implications. Consequently, learning to write for publication is a key skill for bioethicists, and professional journals are critical for the field. One particular journal -- the AMA Journal of Ethics -- has been a stalwart in giving a voice to newcomers to the field...

Why Did the AMA Kill its Journal of Ethics?

The AMA is the nation's largest and most influential medical professional organization, and its Journal of Ethics held the mission of, "illuminating the art of medicine" by being an open access journal, freely available to all, with no advertising, focusing each month on an important ethical issue in healthcare, and, most uniquely perhaps, each issue was edited by health professional trainees and their mentors. Only the AMA, with its mission, resources, and reach, could have produced this journal.

One possible reason for its elimination might be financial. But if financial returns were to be a metric for success, then the AMA JoE had a bad business model from the start: no fees, no subscriptions, no advertising. As Kao argued, a guiding premise for the journal was that "ethics inquiry is a public goodopens in a new tab or window" -- hence no fees or subscriptions and no ads (avoiding conflicts of interest is critical in ethics inquiry).

For the AMA, the business case for AMA JoE could never have been about profit; rather, it was about demonstrating the AMA's integrity, altruism, and service to physicians from very early in their careers. The journal aimed to build goodwill, bolster the AMA's reputation, improve ethical deliberation within the profession and, most importantly, entice students and trainees to engage seriously with the organization. By these metrics it has succeeded. Over its more than 25 years in existence, the journal drew innumerable medical students, residents, and fellows into the AMA. It also provided a crucial training ground for young people in medicine who wanted to learn about bioethics and about writing and editing, and it helped build the credibility and presence of the AMA and its ethics group nationally and internationally.

So, if it wasn't about profit, perhaps it was the political environment. The journal encouraged medical trainees to explore some of the most contentious challenges facing medicine and society, so it inherently provided opportunities for controversy. Issues this year have addressed themes of private equity in medicineopens in a new tab or window, regret and surgical professionalismopens in a new tab or window, and evidence-based design in healthcareopens in a new tab or window. Meanwhile, issues in prior years have addressed some currently inflammatory topics, like ethical issues related to transgender surgical careopens in a new tab or window and segregation in healthcareopens in a new tab or window. Remarkably, the journal still very rarely caused public relations problems for the AMA, perhaps because its editorial staff were highly qualified professionals, but also because its approach to controversy was civil, inquisitive, and exploratory.

As Kao wrote in a farewell essayopens in a new tab or window this month: "For over a quarter of a century, the AMA Journal of Ethics has striven to publish insightful commentaries, engaging podcasts, and provocative artwork that help medical students, physicians, and all health care professionals reflect on and make sound ethical decisions in service to patients and society." In fact, the journal often demonstrated exactly this spirit of respectful discussion about challenging ethical issues that we need to rekindle today, making its loss even more tragic and difficult to explain.

AMA JoE: A Value-Added Offering

In a recent opinion piece in MedPage Today, "Medical Societies Are Facing an Existential Crisis,opens in a new tab or window" the authors exhorted medical societies, facing declining memberships and engagement among young physicians, to reimagine their role by offering "free basic memberships supplemented by value-added services [that] could attract early-career physicians who might otherwise remain disengaged." AMA JoEwas exactly this type of value-added offering that not only served students and trainees, but also educators across health professions. Anecdotally, many health profession educators we know routinely use pieces from AMA JoE in their teaching and now lament its demise.

The AMA has reportedly promisedopens in a new tab or window to keep the historical content of the journal accessible on the AMA JoE website. This is no consolation for the students, residents, and fellows who were working on future issues, but it means the legacy of the journal will live on. Someday, we'd like to believe it might even be revived.

For now, we mourn the loss of AMA JoE for the field of bioethics. Even more, we mourn what the AMA's sudden elimination of its ethics journal might mean for physicians, the profession, and the public."

opens in a new tab or window(AMA JoE) -- has been a stalwart in giving a voice to newcomers to the field.

AMA ethics journal shutters after 26 years; Retraction Watch, November 13, 2025

Retraction Watch; AMA ethics journal shutters after 26 years 

"The American Medical Association will cease publication of its ethics journal at the end of this year. 

The AMA Journal of Ethics, an open access, peer-reviewed journal was founded in 1999 under the name Virtual Mentor. 

“The loss of the AMA JoE will be most acutely felt by medical students and trainees, since it had a unique production model that included them in the process,” said Matthew Wynia, a physician and bioethicist at the University of Colorado whose work has been featured in the journal and who previously led the AMA Institute for Ethics.

The journal  publishes monthly issues on a specific theme, such as private equity in health care, antimicrobial resistance, palliative surgery and more. The journal also covered ethics in publishing and research, including a 2015 article titled “How Publish or Perish Promotes Inaccuracy in Science—and Journalism” written by Retraction Watch’s cofounder Ivan Oransky...

The journal’s website will remain online with all content freely available, “in keeping with our guiding premise that ethics inquiry is a public good,” Audiey C. Kao, editor-in-chief of the AMA Journal of Ethics and vice president of the AMA’s Ethics Group for more than two decades, wrote in a statement on the journal’s website. “With humility, I am hopeful and confident that this archived journal content will stay evergreen for years to come.”

The AMA did not provide a reason for the decision to shutter the journal."

Audiey Kao, MD, PhD, on what physicians need to know about ethics in 2022; American Medical Association (AMA), January 5, 2022

American Medical Association (AMA); Audiey Kao, MD, PhD, on what physicians need to know about ethics in 2022

"AMA's Moving Medicine video series amplifies physician voices and highlights developments and achievements throughout medicine.

Kicking off 2022 with the AMA's "Look Forward/Look Back” series, AMA Chief Experience Officer Todd Unger talks with Audiey Kao, MD, PhD, the AMA's vice president of ethics, about the AMA's critical work in medical ethics and what to expect in the months ahead.

Speaker

• Audiey Kao, MD, PhD, vice president, ethics, AMA...

Unger: In addition to mandates, another one of these key ethics challenges that physicians faced in 2021, and this is a very painful one, is about allocating scarce resources. Throughout the pandemic, we've seen hospitals goal with shortages of ventilators, ICU beds, even staff to take care of critically ill patients. And sometimes, hospitals are forced to implement "crisis standards of care," in which they prioritize patients largely on their likelihood of survival. How did the AMA guide physicians and hospitals in what is an extremely difficult decision?

Dr. Kao: Yeah, I mean, you raise a great point. I mean, according to the AMA Code of Medical Ethics, allocation policies should be based on criteria relating to medical need. It's not appropriate to base allocation policies on social worth, perceived obstacles to treatment, patient contribution to illness or, frankly, past use of resources.

While the Code provides a general framework for addressing allocation decisions, the COVID pandemic revealed that much of the health care system was not prepared to implement allocation policies. To be blunt, these are not decisions we can make on the fly. So, we need to be better prepared. And for the Code, that means its ethical guidance on this critically important topic should be updated. As a living document, the Code is continually updated and this is a prime example of AMA's stewardship of the code I mentioned earlier.

Unger: That's interesting. It's almost this opportunity to take a look back at the year and look beyond what are, I don't know, more theoretical in terms of the ethics and how they were applied to help people learn that. When you're talking about a living document, is that what you're meaning?

Dr. Kao: Yeah, that's right. I mean, I think we have to have a strong dose of humility in medicine to know what we know and what we don't know. And so, to not learn the lessons of this pandemic to apply to how we should care for patients in the future would not speak well of our commitment to promote the health of the public."

AMA calls for privacy guidelines governing mail-order DNA tests; American Medical Association (AMA), November 16, 2021

American Medical Association (AMA); AMA calls for privacy guidelines governing mail-order DNA tests

"Taking a cheek swab and sending it to a mail-order DNA testing company takes only a few minutes, but the information might live on forever—and become widely available.

At its Interim Special meeting, the American Medical Association (AMA) House of Delegates expressed concern that the privacy laws governing genetic information do not apply to these over-the-counter tests. The AMA will work with federal agencies to strengthen the privacy safeguards.

“People curious about their ancestry shouldn’t be worried that the data extracted from saliva will be shared,” said Thomas J. Madejski, M.D., a member of the AMA Board of Trustees. “This can have serious consequences, and again highlights the need to demand privacy for health care records, even seemingly innocuous ones.”...

While federal law prevents health insurance companies and employers from discriminating based on genetic information, these restrictions do not apply to life, disability, or long-term care insurance companies, which can result in insurance application rejections. Users of consumer genetic testing should be advised of the potential risks of their participation.

The AMA will advocate to add long-term care, life, and disability insurance to the federal law overseeing genetic testing. The AMA also will support privacy standards that would prohibit pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, universities, and other entities with financial ties to genetic testing companies from sharing identified information without the consent of the tested individual."

Pandemic serves up new questions of medical right and wrong; American Medical Association, April 13, 2020

Timothy M. Smith, American Medical Association; Pandemic serves up new questions of medical right and wrong

"The COVID-19 pandemic is posing unfamiliar challenges for front-line physicians while also casting new light on longstanding health equity issues. An episode of the “AMA COVID-19 Update” explores several underlying ethical questions. Among these: How much risk is too much for physicians? Which patients should get priority access to scarce resources? And how do socioeconomic factors affect quality of care in an emergency?

In a conversation with the AMA’s chief experience officer, Todd Unger, three experts from the AMA delved into relevant ethical guidance.

The AMA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are closely monitoring the COVID-19 global pandemic. Learn more at the  AMA COVID-19 resource center. Also check out pandemic resources available from the AMA Code of Medical Ethics, JAMA Network™, AMA Journal of Ethics®, and consult the  AMA’s physician guide to COVID-19."

What to tell patients when artificial intelligence is part of the care team; American Medical Association (AMA), February 13, 2019

Staff News Writer, American Medical Association (AMA); What to tell patients when artificial intelligence is part of the care team

"Artificial intelligence (AI) in health care can help manage and analyze data, make decisions and conduct conversations. The availability of AI is destined to drastically change physicians’ roles and everyday practices. It is key that physicians be able to adapt to changes in diagnostics, therapeutics and practices of maintaining patient safety and privacy. However, physicians need to be aware of ethically complex questions about implementation, uses and limitations of AI in health care.   

The February issue of the AMA Journal of Ethics® (@JournalofEthics) features numerous perspectives on AI in health care and gives you an opportunity to earn CME credit."