Toward Coherent Federal Oversight of Medicine

Patricia J. Zettler
{"title":"Toward Coherent Federal Oversight of Medicine","authors":"Patricia J. Zettler","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/5x7mv","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conventional wisdom in U.S. health law and policy holds that states regulate medical practice – the activities of physicians and other health care professionals – while the federal government regulates medical products. But relying on states as the principal regulators of medical practice has, at times, driven law and policy in directions that are problematic from a public health perspective, as demonstrated by a deadly 2012 outbreak of fungal meningitis that was linked to a state-regulated practice known as drug compounding. This Article argues that the federalism concerns underlying the conventional wisdom are misplaced. It demonstrates that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the federal government is deeply entangled in regulating medical practice, and such federal regulation is lawful. After examining the goals of federalism within the context of medicine, the Article proposes an alternate paradigm for guiding decisions about the division of labor between states and the federal government: Congress and administrative agencies should exert federal authority when medical practice contributes to a national public health problem for which state regulation is inadequate. This framework is applied to one pressing public health problem to which medical practice contributes – antibiotic resistance – to show how the framework could be implemented. Federal oversight of medical practice under this framework would be more principled and transparent than the scheme of federal control that is in place today.","PeriodicalId":368113,"journal":{"name":"State & Local Government eJournal","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"State & Local Government eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/5x7mv","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The conventional wisdom in U.S. health law and policy holds that states regulate medical practice – the activities of physicians and other health care professionals – while the federal government regulates medical products. But relying on states as the principal regulators of medical practice has, at times, driven law and policy in directions that are problematic from a public health perspective, as demonstrated by a deadly 2012 outbreak of fungal meningitis that was linked to a state-regulated practice known as drug compounding. This Article argues that the federalism concerns underlying the conventional wisdom are misplaced. It demonstrates that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the federal government is deeply entangled in regulating medical practice, and such federal regulation is lawful. After examining the goals of federalism within the context of medicine, the Article proposes an alternate paradigm for guiding decisions about the division of labor between states and the federal government: Congress and administrative agencies should exert federal authority when medical practice contributes to a national public health problem for which state regulation is inadequate. This framework is applied to one pressing public health problem to which medical practice contributes – antibiotic resistance – to show how the framework could be implemented. Federal oversight of medical practice under this framework would be more principled and transparent than the scheme of federal control that is in place today.
走向连贯的联邦医药监督
美国卫生法律和政策的传统观点认为,各州监管医疗实践——医生和其他卫生保健专业人员的活动——而联邦政府监管医疗产品。但是,从公共卫生的角度来看,依赖国家作为医疗实践的主要监管者,有时会将法律和政策推向有问题的方向,2012年爆发的致命真菌性脑膜炎就证明了这一点,该脑膜炎与一种被称为药物合成的国家监管做法有关。本文认为,传统智慧背后的联邦制担忧是错位的。它表明,与传统观念相反,联邦政府在监管医疗实践方面纠缠不清,而且这种联邦监管是合法的。在考察了医学背景下联邦制的目标之后,该条提出了指导各州和联邦政府之间分工决策的另一种范式:当医疗实践造成了国家公共卫生问题,而国家监管不力时,国会和行政机构应行使联邦权力。将该框架应用于医疗实践造成的一个紧迫的公共卫生问题——抗生素耐药性,以说明如何实施该框架。在这一框架下,联邦对医疗实践的监督将比目前的联邦控制方案更具原则性和透明度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信