Background: Transgender individuals experience limited access to healthcare. This results not least from experiences of discrimination to which they are exposed in the health system. These contribute to transgender individuals having poorer health than cis individuals, i.e. individuals whose sex assigned at birth is in line with their gender identity. It is an ethical duty to take effective measures to minimize inequalities in medical care. At best, such measures should also be assessed as appropriate from the perspective of those affected in order to be accepted and thus effective. It is therefore important to know whether measures touch on the subjectively assumed reasons for experiences of discrimination. Hence, to be able to take appropriate measures, it is important to identify the reasons that transgender individuals see as causal for their experiences of discrimination in healthcare. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 German transgender individuals and asked them about their own experiences of discrimination in healthcare and their assumptions on the reasons for discrimination. We analyzed the responses using the method of structured qualitative content analysis. Results: 13 transgender individuals reported experiences of discrimination in healthcare. These emanated from different professional groups and took place in trans-specific as well as general medical settings. We were able to identify a total of 12 reasons that transgender individuals see as causal for their experiences of discrimination: (1) internalized trans-hostility and “protection” of cis individuals, (2) lack of knowledge/uncertainties regarding transition, (3) “protection” of a binary worldview, (4) binary worldview in medicine, (5) structural deficits, (6) asymmetric interactions with specialists, (7) current political debate, (8) view of transgender individuals as a “burden for society”, (9) objectification, (10) homophobia, (11) misogyny/androcentrism and (12) discrimination as reaction to discrimination. Conclusions: German transgender individuals have a very differentiated picture regarding their subjective reasons for experiencing discrimination in healthcare. Overall, disrespect regarding gender identity and a confrontation with foreignness seems to be seen as the decisive factor. Thus, it is not enough to focus only on measures that aim to remedy the information deficit on the part of medical providers. Measures must be taken that can create a granting and respectful attitude towards transgender individuals.

To provide an ethical analysis of the implications of the usage of artificial intelligence-supported clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSS) in geriatrics. Ethical analysis based on the normative arguments regarding the use of AI-CDSS in geriatrics using a principle-based ethical framework. Normative arguments identified in 29 articles on AI-CDSS in geriatrics. Our analysis is based on a literature search that was done to determine ethical arguments that are currently discussed regarding AI-CDSS. The relevant articles were subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis regarding the ethical considerations Supplementary Datamentioned therein. We then discussed the identified arguments within the frame of the 4 principles of medical ethics according to Beauchamp and Childress and with respect to the needs of frail older adults. We found a total of 5089 articles; 29 articles met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis. We could not identify any systematic analysis of the ethical implications of AI-CDSS in geriatrics. The ethical considerations are very unsystematic and scattered, and the existing literature has a predominantly technical focus emphasizing the technology's utility. In an extensive ethical analysis, we systematically discuss the ethical implications of the usage of AI-CDSS in geriatrics. AI-CDSS in geriatrics can be a great asset, especially when dealing with patients with cognitive disorders; however, from an ethical perspective, we see the need for further research. By using AI-CDSS, older patients' values and beliefs might be overlooked, and the quality of the doctor-patient relationship might be altered, endangering compliance to the 4 ethical principles of Beauchamp and Childress.

Individuals of sexual and gender minority (SGM) form a vulnerable group with specific healthcare needs that might be prone to experience discrimination and restrictions regarding their access to healthcare. As the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) offer a normative perspective on these issues, we analyzed them systematically (1) to identify whether and in what manner ECtHR’s judgments concern restriction of access to healthcare for SGM individuals and (2) to identify and categorize the ways of discrimination to which SGM individuals are exposed. We conducted a systematic search of the database of the ECtHR’s judgments with the use of specified search terms. Descriptive statistics were performed on the identified judgments. Subsequently, we analyzed the judgments with the use of a qualitative method of thematic analysis. We identified n = 73 cases relevant for our study. In n = 7 (9.59%) of judgments, we found limitations of access to healthcare for SGM individuals, e.g., in cases of restrictions for transsexual individuals to receive hormone or surgical therapy. We regard this as a specific form of discrimination. Furthermore, we identified five other categories of discrimination: restriction of parental rights, failure to respect one’s gender identity/sexual orientation, discrimination by jurisdiction, prohibition of promotion, and verbal/physical attacks. The ECtHR proves to have a balanced view on the sensitive topic of sexual self-determination condemning any form of discrimination or restriction of access to healthcare. However, there is a need for further research on discriminatory acts by other individuals, e.g., healthcare providers, rather than by public authorities.

Background: Experiences of discrimination in healthcare lead to poorer mental and physical health for transgender individuals. There is evidence that trans-specialists, i.e. health professionals specializing in transgender care, are an important source of discrimination experienced by transgender individuals in healthcare. In this qualitative interview study, we explored the reasons for this possibly surprising finding by analyzing subjective views of trans-specialists on various issues related to discrimination of transgender individuals. Methods: We conducted 20 semi-structured, qualitative, exploratory interviews with healthcare professionals specializing in transgender care. Interview questions were developed based on an extensive literature analysis and results of previous research on the topic. The interviews were conducted online, were digitally recorded and transcribed. Data analysis was conducted using the methods of content analysis and thematic analysis. Results: The interviewees had great difficulty giving a consistent definition of the concept of gender identity. Most of them saw it as a self-determination of a transgender individual. Although herewith emphasizing the autonomy of transgender individuals, most trans-specialists felt that they had to be convinced of their patient’s transsexuality to carry out treatment. Most trans-specialists reported having had doubts about whether some transgender individuals were suffering from gender incongruence or not. There was also ambiguity among interviewees about whether transsexuality is a mental illness. Conclusions: We were able to identify specific topics that can cause discrimination experiences on the part of transgender individuals in their contact with trans-specialists. These include the vagueness of the construct of gender identity and the ambivalence between respect for the autonomy of transgender individuals and the validation of the diagnosis “transsexuality”. Also, uncertainties regarding the classification of transsexuality as a mental illness can lead to experiences of discrimination. Furthermore, our results imply that trans-specialists might remember own discriminatory behavior less than it actually took place. Our results can contribute to the development of specific measures to avoid discrimination experiences of transgender individuals in contact with trans-specialists. These should include a reflection on one’s own gender identity and training on mechanisms of discrimination.

Introduction: Individuals with disabilities (ID) suffer from restricted access to healthcare. This contributes to their poorer health status and constitutes an ethical challenge. The aim of this research was to systematically analyze judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to illustrate examples of restricted access to healthcare for ID.Methods: Through a search in the ECtHR's database we identified judgments dealing with access to healthcare for ID. The search resulted in n = 329 judgments, of which n = 55 were included in the analysis. A descriptive statistic was performed on Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights and violation of these articles. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted to group the judgments in thematic categories.Results: Most applications were filed against Russia (n = 23), followed by Poland (n = 8) and Ukraine (n = 7). The youngest applicant was 18, the oldest 72 years old. An overwhelming majority of cases dealt with disabled prisoners. Most of the judgments involved Article 14 and Article 8. We identified seven partially overlapping categories representing thematic patterns in the analyzed judgments.Discussion: Any restriction of access to healthcare can be considered a violation of human rights. However, the results show a relatively low total number of judgments dealing with limited access to healthcare for ID. This could be a further confirmation of the fact that ID still experience too little attention in our societies. Especially in the context of detention, ID is restricted from receiving the healthcare they require. Indirect ways of a restricted access to healthcare should not be overseen.

(1) Background: Self-determination is one of the central values of many societies. Self-determination concerns many areas of life, including sexuality. Unfortunately, the sexuality of individuals with intellectual disabilities (IID) is often discriminated against, and even in their everyday care, sexuality is often given too little space, not least because of knowledge deficits of parents and staff. A practicable conceptualization of sexual self-determination is a prerequisite for helping IID to achieve self-determined sexuality. The aim of this paper is to formulate such an applicable conceptualization and to discuss related challenges. (2) Method: This paper uses Harry Frankfurt’s hierarchical conception of desires and the WHO definition of sexuality to develop a suitable understanding of sexual self-determination. (3) Results: The mentioned concepts offer promising tools to develop a conceptualization of sexual self-determination with high practical applicability. (4) Discussion: Sexual self-determination involves decision-making processes in relation to the different dimensions of sexuality. IID do need support to come to these decisions. Challenges that might be involved with such decision processes will be discussed.