The Bridge
What the ‘moral distress’ of doctors tells us about eroding trust in health care
The article discusses the ethical dilemmas faced by healthcare providers when families demand life-sustaining treatments for patients unlikely to benefit, highlighting moral distress and trust issues.
Daniel T. Kim, Albany Medical College
I sit on an ethics review committee at the Albany Med Health System in New York state, where doctors and nurses frequently bring us fraught questions.
Consider a typical case: A 6-month-old child has suffered a severe brain injury following cardiac arrest. A tracheostomy, ventilator and feeding tube are the only treatments keeping him alive. These intensive treatments might prolong the child’s life, but he is unlikely to survive. However, the mother – citing her faith in a miracle – wants to keep the child on life support. The clinical team is distressed – they feel they’re only prolonging the child’s dying process.
Often the question the medical team struggles with is this: Are we obligated to continue life-supporting treatments?
Bioethics, a modern academic field that helps resolve such fraught dilemmas, evolved in its early decades through debates over several landmark cases in the 1970s to the 1990s. The early cases helped establish the right of patients and their families to refuse treatments.
But some of the most ethically challenging cases, in both pediatric and adult medicine, now present the opposite dilemma: Doctors want to stop aggressive treatments, but families insist on continuing them. This situation can often lead to moral distress for doctors – especially at a time when trust in providers is falling.
Consequences of lack of trust
For the family, withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatments from a dying loved one, even if doctors advise that the treatment is unlikely to succeed or benefit the patient, can be overwhelming and painful. Studies show that their stress can be at the same level as people who have just survived house fires or similar catastrophes.
While making such high-stakes decisions, families need to be able to trust their doctor’s information; they need to be able to believe that their recommendations come from genuine empathy to serve only the patient’s interests. This is why prominent bioethicists have long emphasized trustworthiness as a central virtue of good clinicians.
However, the public’s trust in medical leaders has been on a precipitous decline in recent decades. Historical polling data and surveys show that trust in physicians is lower in the U.S. than in most industrialized countries. A recent survey from Sanofi, a pharmaceutical company, found that mistrust of the medical system is even worse among low-income and minority Americans, who experience discrimination and persistent barriers to care. The COVID-19 pandemic further accelerated the public’s lack of trust.
In the clinic, mistrust can create an untenable situation. Families can feel isolated, lacking support or expertise they can trust. For clinicians, the situation can lead to burnout, affecting quality and access to care as well as health care costs. According to the National Academy of Medicine, “The opportunity to attend to and ease suffering is the reason why many clinicians enter the healing professions.” When doctors see their patients suffer for avoidable reasons, such as mistrust, they often suffer as well.
At a time of low trust, families can be especially reluctant to take advice to end aggressive treatment, which makes the situation worse for everyone.
Ethics of the dilemma
Physicians are not ethically obligated to provide treatments that are of no benefit to the patient, or may even be harmful, even if the family requests them. But it can often be very difficult to say definitively what treatments are beneficial or harmful, as each of those can be characterized differently based on the goals of treatment. In other words, many critical decisions depend on judgment calls.
Consider again the typical case of the 6-month-old child mentioned above who had suffered severe brain injury and was not expected to survive. The clinicians told the ethics review committee that even if the child were to miraculously survive, he would never be able to communicate or reach any “normal” milestones. The child’s mother, however, insisted on keeping him alive. So, the committee had to recommend continuing life support to respect the parent’s right to decide.
Physicians inform, recommend and engage in shared decision-making with families to help clarify their values and preferences. But if there’s mistrust, the process can quickly break down, resulting in misunderstandings and conflicts about the patient’s best interests and making a difficult situation more distressing. https://www.youtube.com/embed/MY4e4l-eAFk?wmode=transparent&start=0 Moral distress in health care.
Moral distress
When clinicians feel unable to provide what they believe to be the best care for patients, it can result in what bioethicists call “moral distress.” The term was coined in 1984 in nursing ethics to describe the experience of nurses who were forced to provide treatments that they felt were inappropriate. It is now widely invoked in health care.
Numerous studies have shown that levels of moral distress among clinicians are high, with 58% of pediatric and neonatal intensive care clinicians in a study experiencing significant moral distress. While these studies have identified various sources of moral distress, having to provide aggressive life support despite feeling that it’s not in the patient’s interest is consistently among the most frequent and intense.
Watching a patient suffer feels like a dereliction of duty to many health care workers. But as long as they are appropriately respecting the patient’s right to decide – or a parent’s, in the case of a minor – they are not violating their professional duty, as my colleagues and I argued in a recent paper. Doctors sometimes express their distress as a feeling of guilt, of “having blood on their hands,” but, we argue, they are not guilty of any wrongdoing. In most cases, the distress shows that they’re not indifferent to what the decision may mean for the patient.
Clinicians, however, need more support. Persistent moral distresses that go unaddressed can lead to burnout, which may cause clinicians to leave their practice. In a large American Medical Association survey, 35.7% of physicians in 2022-23 expressed an intent to leave their practice within two years.
But with the right support, we also argued, feelings of moral distress can be an opportunity to reflect on what they can control in the circumstance. It can also be a time to find ways to improve the care doctors provide, including communication and building trust. Institutions can help by strengthening ethics consultation services and providing training and support for managing complex cases.
Difficult and distressing decisions, such as the case of the 6-month-old child, are ubiquitous in health care. Patients, their families and clinicians need to be able to trust each other to sustain high-quality care.
Daniel T. Kim, Assistant Professor of Bioethics, Albany Medical College
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Bridge
Hard Rock International and Coca-Cola Launch ‘Women Empower’ Series for International Women’s Month
Last Updated on March 15, 2026 by Daily News Staff
Hard Rock International is teaming up with long-time partner Coca-Cola to spotlight women shaping the music business with a new content initiative and a month-long slate of events.
Announced Feb. 26, 2026, the collaboration introduces “Women Empower,” a micro-documentary series rolling out throughout March as part of Hard Rock’s annual International Women’s Month celebrations. Alongside the video series, Hard Rock says it’s aiming to host 1,000 live music and special events globally across its Cafes, Hotels, Casinos and Live venues.
A micro-documentary series focused on women across the industry
Rather than focusing only on performers, “Women Empower” highlights women working in a range of roles across music and media. Hard Rock notes that less than 5% of music and media creators are women, and the series is designed to put more faces—and job titles—into the public conversation.
The six featured women include:
- Janelle Abraham — Director/Film Producer
- Kat Luna — Singer/Songwriter
- Minami Minami — Composer/Dancer/Singer
- Claire Murphy — Guitar Tech
- Mayna Nevarez — CEO & Founder, Nevarez Communications
- Wendy Ong — Co-President/CMO, TaP Music
Elena Alvarez, Senior Vice President of Marketing and Brand Partnerships at Seminole Gaming and Hard Rock International, said the brand is using International Women’s Month to “lift the curtain” on the series while tying the celebration back to Hard Rock’s music-first identity and philanthropic work.
$100,000 donation to Women in Music
Hard Rock Heals Foundation®, Hard Rock’s charitable arm, is donating $100,000 to Women in Music, supporting the nonprofit’s education and empowerment efforts.
Nicole Barsalona, President of Women in Music, said the campaign highlights diversity on stage and “the wide range of roles across the music business—and the women behind the scenes whose work drives our industry forward.”
Limited-time Coca-Cola menu items at participating Hard Rock Cafes
Throughout March, participating Hard Rock Cafes will offer a limited-time Coca-Cola-inspired menu tied to the regions represented in the series.
Specialty drinks include:
- Passionfruit Splash — passionfruit beverage with Minute Maid Lemonade, Sprite and cranberry juice
- Mango Guava Chiller — mango and guava-flavored drink with Sprite, pineapple and lime juice
- Spiced Yuzu Soda — spiced brown sugar, yuzu and Coca-Cola blend
Food items include:
- Fattoush Chicken Caesar Salad — romaine with grilled chicken, mint, vegetables, fried naan and red wine Caesar dressing
- Mahi Sandwich — mahi filet with remoulade, lettuce, tomato and shoestring onions, served with seasoned fries
- Dulce de Leche Brownie — brownie with chocolate sauce, vanilla ice cream, dulce de leche and whipped cream
Hard Rock Hotels: curated listening experiences honoring female artists
Hard Rock Hotels will also highlight women in music through live performances, curated playlists and themed listening experiences using the brand’s Sound of Your Stay® program. Hard Rock says guests can expect music-themed amenities such as limited-edition vinyl, memorabilia highlights and playlists centered on female artists—both iconic names and emerging talent.
Events worldwide + Rock Shop merch
Hard Rock says it will host women-led performances, networking events, brunches and other community-driven experiences across its global footprint throughout March.
Hard Rock’s official International Women’s Month T-shirts are available at Rock Shop® retail locations and online.
For the full list of International Women’s Month activations, visit https://www.hardrock.com/women.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
https://stmdailynews.com/the-bridge
Authors
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Community
Arizona Scholarships 2026: $1,500 Awards + Free ACF Virtual Workshops
Arizona scholarships 2026: Arizona scholarships are open through ACF: one application for 160+ awards, plus ARAC’s $1,500 Ashby-Herring scholarships due April 6, 2026.
Last Updated on March 11, 2026 by Daily News Staff
Arizona Scholarships 2026: $1,500 Awards + Free ACF Virtual Workshops
Scholarship season moves fast, and for a lot of Arizona families, the hardest part isn’t writing the essay or gathering transcripts—it’s simply finding the right opportunities in time.
The Archer Ragsdale Arizona Chapter (ARAC), Tuskegee Airmen, Inc. is encouraging students and the community to take advantage of scholarship resources through the Arizona Community Foundation (ACF), including an easy online application that can match applicants with 160+ scholarships—plus virtual workshops where students can get help directly from ACF’s scholarship team.
Whether you’re a high school senior, a current college student, or an adult re-entry student, ACF’s scholarship portal is designed to meet people where they are.
The Big Picture: One Application, 160+ Scholarships
According to the flyer, ACF awarded $6.3 million in scholarships last year, with over 160 scholarships available through a single, easy application.
- Application opens: January 1
- Most deadlines: March and April
- Where to start: https://azfoundation.org/scholarships
- ACF scholarship email: scholarship@azfoundation.org
What to watch for: Even if a student is only targeting one scholarship, completing the ACF application can surface additional matches they didn’t know existed.
ARAC Tuskegee Airmen Scholarship: Ashby-Herring Scholarships ($1,500) — Deadline April 6, 2026
ARAC (Tuskegee Airmen, Inc.) awards two or more scholarships to deserving Arizona students who are college-bound. The flyer highlights the Ashby-Herring scholarships, named in honor of late founding ARAC members who were original Tuskegee Airmen.
Award: Two Ashby-Herring scholarships (each $1,500)
Deadline:April 6, 2026
Apply here:https://www.azfoundation.org/archer-ragsdale
Eligibility:
- Graduating high school senior from Arizona
- Attending a 2-year or 4-year college/university
- African-American
- 3.0 GPA or higher
- Demonstrated financial need
Free Virtual Workshops (Zoom): Get Help With Your Application
If you’ve ever watched a student stall out halfway through an application, these workshops are a smart fix: they’re designed so applicants can work on their scholarship application with support from ACF’s scholarship team.
Workshop dates (Zoom):
- February 12, 2026 — 4:00 to 5:00 p.m.
- March 5, 2026 — 4:00 to 5:00 p.m.
- March 26 — 4:00 to 5:00 p.m. (date listed on flyer; confirm year when registering)
Register here:https://acf.cventevents.com/acfscholarships2026
View the flyer here: https://stmdailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Deadline-updated-12.29.2025-Archer-Ragsdale-Flyer-FINAL.pdf
Download Flyer (PDF)
What to watch for: Register for the dates you can attend and come prepared with what you already have (basic info, activities list, questions). One hour of guided progress can save days of procrastination.
Why This Matters (and Why Sharing Helps)
The Tuskegee Airmen legacy is rooted in excellence, discipline, and breaking barriers—and scholarships tied to that legacy are meant to elevate futures for the next generation.
If you’re a parent, teacher, coach, mentor, or neighbor, consider this your nudge: forward the link, post it in a group chat, or share it with a student who might qualify. Deadlines hit quickly, and the easiest scholarship to win is often the one you actually apply for.
View the press release: https://stmdailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/FOR-IMMEDIATE-RELEASE.pdf
Related Links:
- https://azfoundation.org/scholarships
- https://acf.cventevents.com/acfscholarships2026
- https://www.azfoundation.org/archer-ragsdale
College Life
College isn’t just classes and credits — it’s learning how to manage your time, money, health, and relationships while you build a future that actually fits. In our College Life coverage, STM Daily News shares practical, real-world guides for students and families: campus living tips, study and productivity habits, career prep, budgeting basics, mental wellness check-ins, and smart ways to make the most of college in Arizona and beyond.
Expect quick reads, useful takeaways, and “what to do next” advice — whether you’re a first-year student, a transfer, or heading back to school.
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Bridge
Scrappy, campy and unabashedly queer, public access TV series of the 1980s and 1990s offered a rare glimpse into LGBTQ+ life
Last Updated on March 10, 2026 by Daily News Staff
“Hello to all you lovely lesbians out there! My name is Debbie, and I’m here to show you a few things about taking care of your vaginal health.”
So opens the first “Lesbian Health” segment on “Dyke TV,” a lesbian feminist television series that aired on New York’s public access stations from 1993 to 2006.
The half-hour program focused on lesbian activism, community issues, art and film, news, health, sports and culture. Created by three artist-activists – Cuban playwright Ana Simo, theater director and producer Linda Chapman and independent filmmaker Mary Patierno – “Dyke TV” was one of the first TV shows made by and for LGBTQ women.
While many people might think LGBTQ+ representation on TV began in the 1990s on shows like “Ellen” and “Will & Grace,” LGBTQ+ people had already been producing their own television programming on local stations in the U.S. and Canada for decades.
In fact my research has identified hundreds of LGBTQ+ public access series produced across the country.
In a media environment historically hostile to LGBTQ+ people and issues, LGBTQ+ people created their own local programming to shine a spotlight on their lives, communities and concerns.
Experimentation and advocacy
On this particular health segment on “Dyke TV,” a woman proceeds to give herself a cervical exam in front of the camera using a mirror, a flashlight and a speculum.
Close-up shots of this woman’s genitalia show her vulva, vagina and cervix as she narrates the exam in a matter-of-fact tone, explaining how viewers can use these tools on their own to check for vaginal abnormalities. Recalling the ethos of the women’s health movement of the 1970s, “Dyke TV” instructs audiences to empower themselves in a world where women’s health care is marginalized.
Because public access TV in New York was relatively unregulated, the show’s hosts could openly discuss sexual health and air segments that would otherwise be censored on broadcast networks.
Like today’s LGBTQ content creators, many of the producers of LGBTQ+ public access series experimented with genre, form and content in entertaining and imaginative ways.
LGBTQ+ actors, entertainers, activists and artists – who often experienced discrimination and tokenism on mainstream media – appeared on these series to publicize and discuss their work. Iconic drag queen RuPaul got his start performing on public access in Atlanta, where “The American Music Show” gave him a platform to promote his burgeoning drag persona in the mid-1980s. https://www.youtube.com/embed/hab5HrnfEZk?wmode=transparent&start=0 RuPaul appears on a 1985 episode of ‘The American Music Show.’
The producers often saw their series as a blend of entertainment, art and media activism.
Shows like “The Gay Dating Game” and “Be My Guest” were tongue-in-cheek satires of 1950s game shows. News programs such as “Gay USA,” which broadcast its first episode in 1985, reported on local and national LGBTQ news and health issues.
Variety shows like “The Emerald City” in the 1970s, “Gay Morning America” in the 1980s, and “Candied Camera” in the 1990s combined interviews, musical performances, comedy skits and news programming. Scripted soap operas, like “Secret Passions,” starred amateur gay actors. And on-the-street interview programs like “The Glennda and Brenda Show” used drag and street theater to spark discussions about LGBTQ issues.
Other programs featured racier content.
In the 1980s and ‘90s, “Men & Films,” “The Closet Case Show” and “Robin Byrd’s Men for Men” incorporated interviews with porn stars, clips from porn videos and footage of sex at nightclubs and parties.
Skirting the censors
The regulation of sex on cable television has long been a political and cultural flashpoint.
But regulatory loopholes inadvertently allowed sexual content on public access. This allowed hosts and guests to talk openly about gay sex and safer sex practices on these shows – and even demonstrate them on camera.
The impetus for public access television was similar to the ethos of public broadcasting, which sought to create noncommercial and educational television programming in the service of the public interest.
In 1972, the Federal Communications Commission issued an order requiring cable television systems in the country’s top 100 markets to offer access channels for public use. The FCC mandated that cable companies make airtime, equipment and studio space to individuals and community groups to use for their own programming on a first-come, first-serve basis.
The FCC’s regulatory authority does not extend to editorial control over public access content. For this reason, repeated attempts to block, regulate and censor programming throughout the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s were challenged by cable access producers and civil liberties organizations.
The Supreme Court has continually struck down laws that attempt to censor cable access programming on First Amendment grounds. A cable operator can refuse to air a program that contains “obscenity,” but what counts as obscenity is up for interpretation.
Over the years, producers of LGBTQ-themed shows have fiercely defended their programming from calls for censorship, and the law has consistently been on their side.
Airing the AIDS crisis
As the AIDS crisis began to devastate LGBTQ+ communities in the 1980s, public access television grew increasingly important.
Many of the aforementioned series devoted multiple segments and episodes to discussing the devastating impact of HIV/AIDS on their personal lives, relationships and communities. Series like “Living with AIDS”, “HoMoVISIONES” and “ACT UP Live!” were specifically designed to educate and galvanize viewers around HIV/AIDS activism. With HIV/AIDS receiving minimal coverage on mainstream media outlets – and a lack of political action by local, state and national officials – these programs were some of the few places where LGBTQ+ people could learn the latest information about the epidemic and efforts to combat it.
The long-running program “Gay USA” is one of the few remaining LGBTQ+ public access series; new episodes air locally in New York and nationally via Free Speech TV each week. While public access stations still exist in most cities around the country, production has waned since the advent of cheaper digital media technologies and streaming video services in the mid-2000s.
And yet during this media era – let’s call it “peak public access TV” – these scrappy, experimental, sexual, campy and powerful series offered remarkable glimpses into LGBTQ+ culture, history and activism.
Lauren Herold, Visiting Assistant Professor of Gender & Sexuality Studies, Kenyon College
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Bridge is a section of the STM Daily News Blog meant for diversity, offering real news stories about bona fide community efforts to perpetuate a greater good. The purpose of The Bridge is to connect the divides that separate us, fostering understanding and empathy among different groups. By highlighting positive initiatives and inspirational actions, The Bridge aims to create a sense of unity and shared purpose. This section brings to light stories of individuals and organizations working tirelessly to promote inclusivity, equality, and mutual respect. Through these narratives, readers are encouraged to appreciate the richness of diverse perspectives and to participate actively in building stronger, more cohesive communities.
https://stmdailynews.com/category/the-bridge
Author
Discover more from Daily News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
