(Image: LinkedIn)

Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly beginning to transform many industries, including healthcare, where it is playing an increasingly important role in medical diagnostics which is the process of identifying diseases and medical conditions. By analysing medical data quickly and accurately, AI has the potential to improve the healthcare system; however, its use in diagnostics also comes with ethical risks.

Currently, one of the most common applications of AI is in medical imaging. AI is used to analyse X-rays, CT scans, and MRIs in order to detect abnormalities such as malignant tumors, fractures, or other signs of disease or injury. AI is beneficial in imaging because it can reduce human error. Doctors who review scans multiple times a day are more prone to mistakes due to fatigue, and AI helps reduce that risk. AI can also process larger amounts of medical data, increasing efficiency for doctors treating patients and allowing small patterns in data to be identified and addressed accordingly.

Although the use of AI in diagnostics has many advantages and may seem like the most efficient way to diagnose patients, there are still many concerns. A major concern is the quality of AI systems. The accuracy of diagnostic AI depends heavily on the data on which it is trained, which can lead to bias and inaccurate results if the data is incomplete or unrepresentative. Moreover, many medical professionals question how AI systems are trained and what data is used. Medical data is sensitive and difficult to obtain, and AI systems raise concerns about protecting patient privacy, especially when companies prioritize efficiency or profit over patient trust.

Following this line of reasoning, many medical professionals also raise legal and ethical questions regarding the use of AI and patients’ sensitive medical data. Doctors value patient trust and consent above AI systems and therefore will always review and confirm diagnoses made by AI.

It is still too early to determine whether AI in diagnostics is ultimately more beneficial or harmful. While experimentation with AI in medicine is becoming more common, testing, regulations, and guidelines remain strict before AI can be fully implemented in medical settings. It is important to remember the role of healthcare professionals in this process: they are not being replaced by AI, but rather assisted by it. Doctors retain full control over final decisions about patient care and prioritize effective and ethical treatment.

Overall, it is clear that AI has the potential to significantly improve medical diagnostics by enhancing accuracy and accessibility. While challenges related to ethics, data quality, and patient trust remain, careful development and responsible use of AI can make it a valuable tool for doctors to support and confirm diagnoses. Continued research and collaboration between technology experts and healthcare professionals will help advance the healthcare industry and move it forward.

Works Cited

Al-Antari, Mugahed A. "Artificial Intelligence for Medical Diagnostics-Existing and Future AI Technology!." Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) vol. 13,4 688. 12 Feb. 2023, doi:10.3390/diagnostics13040688. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

"Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Health Care." Congress.gov, Library of Congress, 26 December 2025, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48319 . Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Dmulford. "AI in Higher Education: A Meta Summary of Recent Surveys of Students and Faculty." Campbell Academic Technology Services, 6 Mar. 2025, sites.campbell.edu/academictechnology/2025/03/06/ai-in-higher-education-a-summary-of-recent-surveys-of-students-and-faculty/ . Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

(Image: Sri Ramakrishna Hospital)

Jehovah’s Witnesses are a Christian denomination known for following the Bible very strictly. A central belief in their faith is that they must not accept blood, including in medical treatments. This means members refuse blood transfusions, even when such a procedure could save their life. For doctors and hospitals, this belief creates complex ethical questions about patient autonomy, medical responsibility, and the limits of medical intervention.

The refusal of blood transfusions comes from biblical passages, mainly in Acts and Leviticus, which the church interprets as forbidding the intake of blood. For Jehovah’s Witnesses, this is not optional; it is a matter of conscience and religious duty. Their convictions apply even in critical situations, such as severe blood loss during surgery, major trauma, or serious anemia. For physicians, this presents the challenge of treating life-threatening conditions without a standard and widely accepted treatment.

For adult patients, medical ethics and the law generally uphold the right to refuse treatment. This means a competent adult cannot be forced to accept a blood transfusion, even if refusing it could be fatal. Doctors are legally and ethically bound to respect the patient’s decision while making every effort to provide safe and effective care within the patient’s constraints. Respecting these decisions often requires detailed conversations, careful documentation, and a willingness to explore alternatives to traditional transfusions.

Cases involving minors are far more complicated. When parents refuse blood transfusions for a child, courts often step in. In these situations, judges usually prioritize the child’s right to life over the parents’ religious beliefs. Hospitals may be allowed to perform a transfusion, sometimes against the family’s wishes. These cases frequently provoke debate, raising questions about parental authority, the rights of the child, and religious freedom. Each case must be evaluated individually, balancing medical urgency, ethical obligations, and legal requirements.

Medical advancements have provided options that make it easier to respect these religious convictions. Bloodless surgery techniques, erythropoietin therapy, volume expanders, and autologous blood recovery enable physicians to treat patients effectively without donor blood. Hospitals with dedicated “bloodless medicine” programs demonstrate that even complex surgeries and trauma care can be performed safely, reducing the ethical tension between treatment and religious belief.

The situation of Jehovah’s Witnesses emphasizes a larger ethical issue in medicine: the tension between respecting personal beliefs and providing optimal medical care. Physicians must communicate clearly about risks, explore all available alternatives, and ensure that patients or their guardians give fully informed consent. This approach requires both medical skill and moral sensitivity, reminding healthcare providers that patient care is about more than following procedures. It is about understanding the patient’s values and working within them.

Jehovah’s Witnesses’ refusal of blood transfusions continues to shape hospital policies, ethical guidelines, and medical education worldwide. It highlights the importance of empathy, cultural competence, and flexibility in healthcare. These cases show that ethical care is not only about preserving life but also about honoring deeply held convictions, demonstrating that religion, ethics, and medicine are intertwined in ways that cannot be ignored.

Ultimately, Jehovah’s Witnesses provide a powerful example of how personal belief can influence medical decision-making. Their stance challenges the medical system to find solutions that respect patient autonomy without compromising safety. It is a reminder that medicine is not only a science but also a practice that involves judgment, understanding, and respect for the individuals it serves.

Works Cited: 

American Association of Blood Banks. “Jehovah’s Witnesses and Blood Transfusion.” Transfusions.org, 12 Jan. 2021, www.transfusions.org/2021/01/jehovahs-witnesses-and-blood-transfusion.html.   Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

JAMA Network. “Bloodless Medicine and Surgery for Jehovah’s Witnesses.” JAMA, jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/320175.   Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

National Library of Medicine. “Bloodless Surgery in Jehovah’s Witness Patients.” PubMed, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19223803/.  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

National Library of Medicine. “Ethical and Clinical Considerations for Bloodless Medicine.” PubMed, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19272827/.   Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Jehovah’s Witnesses. “Jehovah’s Witnesses: Why They Refuse Blood Transfusions.” JW.org, www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jehovahs-witnesses-why-no-blood-transfusions/.  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Jehovah’s Witnesses. Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Question of Blood. JW.org, www.jw.org/en/library/brochures/Jehovahs-Witnesses-and-the-Question-of-Blood/.   Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

(Image: eLearning Industry)

AI is becoming an increasingly important part of modern healthcare, and as its usage becomes more commonplace and reliable, it is expected not only to influence how medicine is practised but also to change the industry as a whole. Many people have anxieties about whether AI can be trusted in healthcare or if it is entirely safe to use in clinical settings. However, healthcare professionals who trust and actively use AI emphasize that its goal in medicine is to support future doctors, not replace them.

AI, whether the public supports it or not, is already widespread in healthcare. Hospitals and clinics are using AI to analyse medical images, review patient records, and diagnose illnesses by identifying patterns in data. The growing use of AI is driven by the healthcare industry’s demand for faster, more accurate, and more efficient decision-making. Many professionals who support AI argue that it allows time-consuming and tedious tasks to be completed more efficiently, leaving doctors with more time to focus on patient care and human interaction rather than paperwork. This benefits not only patients but also doctors, whose already taxing and stressful jobs can be made easier through the use of AI, helping to reduce physical and mental burnout.

Despite these benefits and the strong support for AI among many professionals, one major concern is the risk of over-reliance on AI systems. In colleges and universities, the use of AI in assignments and learning has been shown to be potentially harmful. While not as extreme as portrayed on social media, AI can lower the writing and critical thinking skills of students who rely on it too heavily. Fortunately, most medical students tend to view AI as an administrative tool rather than a crucial clinical one. Future doctors are generally cautious about trusting AI outputs and rely more on their own critical observations than on AI systems. Many are also aware that AI can be biased and that improper use may leave patient data unprotected, increasing the risk of security breaches or misuse of sensitive medical information.

As technology continues to advance, healthcare will advance alongside it. These industries work closely together, and as AI becomes more integrated into healthcare, the role of the doctor will continue to evolve. Future doctors will need to consider which aspects of their work benefit from the support of artificial intelligence and which require independent human judgment. Above all, it is vital for future doctors to remember that human judgment, empathy, and communication can only come from another human. In their practice, they must value their own intelligence and decision-making above any technological tools while developing the skills needed to use AI responsibly and ethically.

Works Cited: 

Pearl, Robert. "In the AI Revolution, Medical Schools Are Falling behind U.S. Colleges." Forbes, 7 July 2025, www.forbes.com/sites/robertpearl/2025/07/07/in-the-ai-revolution-medical-schools-are-falling-behind-us-colleges/ . Accessed 22 Dec. 2025.

Ukwuoma, Chiagoziem C et al. "A hybrid explainable ensemble transformer encoder for pneumonia identification from chest X-ray images." Journal of advanced research vol. 48 (2023): 191-211. doi:10.1016/j.jare.2022.08.021. Dec 2025

(Image: Virginia Beach OBGYN)

Ever notice how everyone talks about guys having wet dreams in health class, but no one bothers to explain why girls’ underwear gets mysteriously and randomly bleached? It’s confusing, frustrating, and disheartening. It also signals a massive gap in the public school system. Women’s health often gets treated as taboo when it shouldn’t be. Let’s break the menstrual cycle down, simply, phase by phase, with some tips along the way to make life a little easier. 

Menstrual Phase (Days 1-5): This is when your period happens. The uterus sheds its lining and that’s what makes you bleed. Cramps, fatigue, and mood swings are considered common. 

Tips: Eat iron-rich foods, such as spinach, beans, red meat, in particular will help replace blood loss, and complex carbs will support your energy levels. Gentle exercises like walking or stretching can reduce cramps. Warm baths or heating pads can work wonders too. 

Follicular Phase (Days 1-13): Starting on the first day of your period, your body prepares an egg for ovulation. The estrogen hormone rises which can help boost energy and mood. 

Tips: Eat tons of protein, leafy greens, and foods rich in vitamin C to support hormone production. This is a great time for new projects, social activities, or starting a new workout routine since energy levels tend to be higher. 

Ovulation (Day 14-ish): The ovary releases an egg. Fertility peaks here. Some people notice changes in the amount of cervical mucus that is produced. Estrogen and testosterone levels tend to be at their highest. 

Tips: Eating foods that support liver function, like broccoli or avocado, can balance out different hormones. Hydration is essential! This period is ideal for intense workouts or creative projects. Social confidence can also rise, so lean into it!

Luteal Phase (Days 15-28): After ovulation, progesterone rises to prepare the uterus for pregnancy. If no pregnancy takes place, hormone levels drop, and it leads to your period. PMS symptoms like bloating , irritability, and cravings are common. 

Tips: Complex carbs, magnesium-rich foods, such as nuts and dark chocolate, and plenty of water can help with bloating and mood swings. It is better to avoid excessive caffeine or sugar, which can often worsen symptoms.  Practicing gentle yoga, meditation, or journaling can reduce stress. Sleep is especially important during this phase. 

Knowing your menstrual cycle isn’t just about preventing surprises in your underwear. It helps women, and girls alike, understand why, how and when their mood swings and energy changes will appear and how that will impact their overall health. Tracking your cycle can even help spot irregularities that might need medical attention. 

It’s time for schools to give girls the same, clear factual education that boys get about their bodies. Periods are natural, normal and nothing to be embarrassed about!

Works Cited: 

Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Menstrual Cycle.” Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2024,

  www.britannica.com/science/menstrual-cycle  Accessed 18 Dec. 2025.

“Menstrual Cycle: What’s Normal, What’s Not.” Mayo Clinic, Mayo Foundation for Medical

  Education and Research, 2024,

   www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/womens-health/in-depth/menstrual-cycle/art-20047186 Accessed 18 Dec. 2025.

“Physiology, Menstrual Cycle.” StatPearls, StatPearls Publishing, 2024,

  www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/books/n/statpearls/article-24987 Accessed 18 Dec. 2025.

“Stages of Menstrual Cycle.” Healthline, 2023,

  www.healthline.com/health/womens-health/stages-of-menstrual-cycle Accessed 18 Dec. 2025.

“The Menstrual Cycle.” UCSF Health, University of California San Francisco, 2024,

  www.ucsfhealth.org/education/the-menstrual-cycle Accessed 18 Dec. 2025.

“Your Menstrual Cycle.” Office on Women’s Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human

  Services, 2024, womenshealth.gov/menstrual-cycle/your-menstrual-cycle. Accessed 18 Dec. 2025.

(Image: UAMS Health)

If you’ve ever cracked your knuckles, chances are someone has warned you that you’re going to get arthritis. It’s one of those warnings that seems to follow you from middle school all the way to adulthood. But is there any truth to it?

The short answer is no. Studies haven’t found a link between knuckle cracking and arthritis. The sound you hear when you crack your knuckles comes from gas bubbles in the synovial fluid, which lubricates your joints, popping. It might be annoying to others in the room, but it isn’t damaging your joints in the long term.

One of the most famous investigations into this idea was done by Dr. Donald L. Unger, a physician from California. Dr. Unger decided to test the myth on himself. Starting as a young man, he made a habit of cracking the knuckles on his left hand at least twice a day while never cracking the knuckles on his right hand. He did this for more than 50 years, logging tens of thousands of cracks in his left hand and none in his right. After all that time, X‑rays showed no signs of arthritis in either hand, and there was no meaningful difference between them. Dr. Unger published his findings in the medical journal Arthritis and Rheumatism in 1998 and later received an Ig Nobel Prize in Medicine, which recognises research that makes people laugh and then think.

Beyond Dr. Unger’s experiment, larger studies support the same conclusion. For example, a study in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine looked at over 200 adults aged 50 to 89. The researchers compared people who regularly cracked their knuckles to those who did not. They found that arthritis was just as common in non-crackers as in crackers. This shows that the act of cracking your fingers does not appear to increase the risk of osteoarthritis. Arthritis is mostly influenced by age, genetics, injuries, and repetitive stress on the joints, not by the harmless habit of popping your fingers.

So why does the myth persist? Part of it is social. The cracking sound is loud and unusual, and it annoys people, which makes them more likely to warn you against it. Another reason is a misunderstanding of arthritis. Many people think any odd joint noise must be harmful, when in reality arthritis is caused by cartilage breakdown, not gas bubbles bursting in joint fluid.

That said, habitual knuckle cracking isn’t entirely risk-free. Some people may experience mild swelling, discomfort, or temporarily reduced grip strength if they crack excessively. Aggressive or forceful cracking could irritate ligaments or soft tissue, but these effects are uncommon and not the same as developing arthritis.

For teens, the takeaway is clear: cracking your knuckles is mostly harmless and will not give you arthritis. If it annoys friends or family, consider doing it less often in shared spaces. If you notice pain or swelling, it’s worth talking to a doctor, but otherwise you can relax.

In the end, the myth that knuckle cracking causes arthritis is just that, a myth. Science, including decades-long experiments and larger studies, shows that your joints are fine even if you crack them daily. Next time someone warns you, you can share the facts and save yourself from unnecessary worry.

Works Cited: 

“Cracking Your Knuckles: Does It Cause Arthritis?” Medical News Today, https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/259603.php. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

“Debunking Arthritis Myths.” Arthritis Foundation, https://www.arthritis.org/health-wellness/about-arthritis/understanding-arthritis/debunking-arthritis-myths. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

“Does Cracking Knuckles Cause Arthritis?” Harvard Health Publishing, 6 July 2020, https://www.health.harvard.edu/pain/does-cracking-knuckles-cause-arthritis. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

“Does Knuckle Cracking and Arthritis: Myth vs. Reality.” Apollo 247, www.apollo247.com/health-topics/arthritis/knuckle-cracking-and-arthritis-myth-vs-reality. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

“Is Knuckle Cracking Bad? Can It Lead to Arthritis?” Rheumatology Advisor, https://www.rheumatologyadvisor.com/news/is-knuckle-cracking-bad-can-it-lead-to-arthritis/. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

deWeber, Kevin, Mariusz Olszewski, and Rebecca Ortolano. “Knuckle Cracking and Hand Osteoarthritis.” Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, vol. 24, no. 2, 2011, pp. 169–174, https://www.jabfm.org/content/24/2/169/tab-article-info. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Unger, Donald L. “Does Knuckle Cracking Lead to Arthritis of the Fingers?” PubMed, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9588755/. Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

(Image: Youtube)

    In September of 1848, a quiet railroad construction site in Cavendish, Vermont became the setting for one of the most famous medical case studies in history. Phineas Gage, a 25 year old railroad foreman, survived an accident that should have killed him instantly. A three foot seven inch iron tamping rod blasted straight through his skull, entering below his left cheekbone and exiting through the top of his head. What made Gage’s case extraordinary was not just that he lived, but that he walked, talked, and remained conscious moments after the injury. What followed, however, revealed something far more important: how deeply the brain is tied to personality, behavior, and decision making.

Gage was working with a crew preparing explosive charges to clear rock for a new railway line. His job involved packing gunpowder into drilled holes using a tamping rod, then sealing it with sand. On that day, Gage skipped the sand step. When the iron rod struck the powder directly, it sparked an explosion. The rod was propelled upward with immense force, piercing his face, passing behind his left eye, destroying part of his frontal lobe, and landing several yards away, covered in blood and brain tissue.

Amazingly, Gage did not lose consciousness. According to witnesses and his physician, Dr. John Martyn Harlow, Gage was able to speak within minutes and even rode in an ox cart to the nearby hotel where he received treatment. Dr. Harlow cleaned the wound and removed bone fragments. Infection was a major concern in the pre antibiotic era, and Gage did suffer from severe inflammation, fever, and delirium during recovery. At one point, his family believed he would die. Against all expectations, he survived.

Physically, Gage recovered well. He could walk, speak clearly, and retained his memory and basic intelligence. His vision in the left eye was lost, but otherwise, his body seemed largely intact. It was his behavior that changed in ways no one anticipated.

Before the accident, Gage was described as responsible, polite, reliable, and respected by his employers. Afterward, those who knew him said he was no longer “Gage.” He became impulsive, impatient, and socially inappropriate. He used profanity excessively, struggled to plan ahead, and had difficulty holding a job. His employers refused to rehire him, stating that he could no longer be trusted with responsibility. These changes were not subtle. Friends and family noticed them immediately.

Today, these symptoms are understood as classic signs of damage to the frontal lobes, particularly the prefrontal cortex. This area of the brain is responsible for personality expression, impulse control, emotional regulation, and decision making. Gage’s injury provided early evidence that different parts of the brain have specialized functions. At the time, many scientists believed the brain worked as a whole, rather than through distinct regions. Gage’s case challenged that belief.

In the years after the accident, Gage struggled to find stability. He worked briefly as a stagecoach driver in Chile, a job that required routine and focus, suggesting that some functions improved over time. This points to neuroplasticity, the brain’s ability to adapt after injury. Eventually, his health declined. He began experiencing seizures and died in 1860, nearly twelve years after the accident.

Phineas Gage’s skull and tamping rod are now preserved at Harvard Medical School, where they continue to be studied. Modern imaging techniques have helped scientists better understand the exact brain regions affected and explain his behavioral changes with greater accuracy.

Gage’s story is more than a shocking medical anomaly. It marked a turning point in neuroscience and psychology. His case demonstrated that personality is rooted in brain structure, not just character or upbringing. For modern medicine, Phineas Gage remains a powerful reminder that survival does not always mean full recovery, and that injuries to the brain can reshape a person’s identity in profound and lasting ways.

Works Cited:

Berkeley Well-Being Institute. “Phineas Gage.” Berkeley Well-Being Institute, www.berkeleywellbeing.com/phineas-gage.html.  Accessed 20 Dec. 2025.

Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Phineas Gage.” Britannica, www.britannica.com/biography/Phineas-Gage.  Accessed 22 Dec.  2025.

McGill University Office for Science and Society. “Living with Half a Brain: Phineas Gage.” McGill University, www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/history/living-half-brain-phineas-gage.  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

New England Historical Society. “Phineas Gage Gets an Iron Rod Through His Skull and Survives.” New England Historical Society, newenglandhistoricalsociety.com/phineas-gage-gets-iron-rod-through-skull-survives/.  Accessed 22 Dec. 2025.

The Naked Scientists. “The Extraordinary Life of Phineas Gage.” The Naked Scientists, www.thenakedscientists.com/articles/science-features/extraordinary-life-phineas-gage. Accessed 20 Dec. 2025.

JRank Psychology Encyclopedia. “Phineas Gage.” JRank, reference.jrank.org/psychology/Phineas_Gage.html.  Accessed 22 Dec. 2025.

(Image: California Women's Law Center)

  In 1973, the United States Supreme Court decided a case that would permanently alter the relationship between medicine, law, and personal autonomy. Roe v. Wade was not just a political turning point. It was a medical case at its core, centered on patient care, physician judgment, and the limits of government involvement in healthcare decisions. For decades, it shaped how doctors practiced medicine and how patients accessed reproductive care.

The case began in Texas, where state law made abortion illegal in nearly all circumstances. The plaintiff, identified under the pseudonym “Jane Roe,” was a pregnant woman who wanted to terminate her pregnancy but was unable to do so legally. The defendant, Henry Wade, was the Dallas County district attorney responsible for enforcing the law. Roe argued that the Texas statute violated her constitutional rights, particularly the right to privacy implied by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

When the case reached the Supreme Court, the justices were faced with a complex question: to what extent could the state regulate abortion without violating individual liberty? The Court ruled 7 to 2 in favor of Roe. In its decision, the Court held that the Constitution protects a pregnant person’s right to choose to have an abortion, especially during the early stages of pregnancy. At the same time, the ruling acknowledged that the state has an interest in protecting both maternal health and potential life.

To balance these interests, the Court introduced the trimester framework. During the first trimester, abortion decisions were left almost entirely to the patient and their physician. In the second trimester, states could regulate abortion in ways related to maternal health. In the third trimester, once the fetus was considered viable, states could restrict or ban abortions except when necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person. This framework placed doctors at the center of the decision making process, recognizing their medical expertise rather than treating abortion as solely a legal or moral issue.

From a medical standpoint, Roe v. Wade transformed reproductive healthcare. It allowed physicians to provide abortion services without fear of criminal prosecution, leading to safer procedures and standardized medical guidelines. Before Roe, illegal abortions were a significant cause of injury and death. Patients often resorted to unsafe methods or unqualified providers. After the ruling, abortion became regulated as a medical procedure, reducing complications and mortality rates.

The decision also reinforced the principle of doctor patient confidentiality. By framing abortion as a private medical decision, Roe strengthened the idea that healthcare choices should be made based on medical judgment and patient consent, not political pressure. This principle extended beyond abortion and influenced broader discussions about bodily autonomy, informed consent, and reproductive rights.

However, Roe v. Wade was controversial from the moment it was decided. Critics argued that the Constitution does not explicitly mention abortion and that the decision overstepped judicial authority. Supporters countered that many medical decisions rely on implied rights to privacy and liberty, even when not explicitly written into law. Over time, states passed numerous regulations testing the limits of Roe, leading to additional Supreme Court cases that modified but did not overturn the original ruling.

That changed in 2022 with Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, when the Supreme Court overturned Roe. The Court ruled that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion and returned regulatory power to the states. This decision had immediate consequences for the medical industry. In states with trigger laws or strict bans, doctors faced legal uncertainty, particularly in emergency situations involving miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, or severe complications.

For medical professionals, the end of Roe raised ethical concerns. Physicians must now navigate conflicts between legal restrictions and established standards of care. In some cases, delays in treatment have been reported due to fear of prosecution, highlighting the tension between law and medicine that Roe once sought to resolve.

Roe v. Wade remains one of the most significant court cases affecting healthcare in American history. Even though it is no longer law, its legacy continues to influence debates about medical ethics, patient rights, and the role of government in healthcare decisions. At its core, the case asked a question that still matters today: who should have the final say in deeply personal medical choices, the patient and doctor, or the state?

Works Cited:

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “Abortion Is Healthcare.” ACOG, www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/abortion-is-healthcare  .  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Abortion Surveillance, United States.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00041486.htm .  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Encyclopedia Britannica. “Roe v. Wade.” Britannica, www.britannica.com/event/Roe-v-Wade .  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Legal Information Institute. “Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).” Cornell Law School, www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/410/113 .  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Oyez. “Roe v. Wade.” Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/1971/70-18.  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.

Supreme Court of the United States. “Roe v. Wade.” Justia, supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/ .  Accessed 24 Dec. 2025.