The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics最新文献

{"title":"Post-COVID U.S. Legal Reforms Promoting Public Health and Equity","authors":"J. Hodge, Sarah A. Wetter, Jennifer L. Piatt, H. Reinke","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3703386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3703386","url":null,"abstract":"There is no clear silver lining to the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, arising from the crisis are substantial changes in laws and policies to improve public health responses and advance health equity. Some seismic legal shifts are already underway; others are in conceptual stages. We propose and explore ten major areas of legal and policy reforms precipitated by unprecedented responses and experiences underlying the COVID-19 pandemic. These include (1) constitutional assurances to abate health inequities; (2) extensive reconsideration of national and state emergency public health laws and policies; (3) development of emergency measures to counter-balance economic impacts; (4) tax laws and policies supporting wider provision of health services; (5) unification of data gathering, reporting, and sharing practices; (6) greater access to basic health care services; (7) enhanced reproductive health protections; (8) elimination of structural racial inequities impacting health outcomes; (9) law enforcement approaches promoting social justice; and (10) renewed acclimation of “health-in-all-policies.”","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123964290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Guests with Guns: Public Support for “No Carry” Defaults on Private Land","authors":"I. Ayres, S. Jonnalagadda","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3623643","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3623643","url":null,"abstract":"A nationally representative survey of 2000 American adults shows broad support for prohibiting gun-possession on private land without the landowner's explicit permission. Many states have laws which permit concealed weapon carry unless explicitly prohibited by the landowner, but our survey suggests statistically-significant majorities would prefer “no carry” defaults with regard to homeowners, employers, and retailers. While respondents who are Republican, male, or gun owners are more likely to support “carry” defaults, we find that the majoritarian rejection of “carry” defaults does not tend to vary by region or state. However, our survey does find majority support for a default right to possess guns in rented property and on an employer's parking lot. Respondents across all contexts also report substantial ignorance or misinformation about the law. Landowners who don't know or mistakenly believe that concealed carry is, by default, prohibited on their land may be less able to protect themselves by explicitly prohibiting such third-party possession.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131495327","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Has Global Health Law Risen to Meet the COVID-19 Challenge? Revisiting the International Health Regulations to Prepare for Future Threats","authors":"L. Gostin, Roojin Habibi, B. Meier","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3598165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3598165","url":null,"abstract":"Global health law is essential in responding to the infectious disease threats of a globalizing world, where no single country, or border, can wall off disease","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129961757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Coronavirus Pandemic: Public Health and American Values","authors":"M. Rothstein","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3571455","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3571455","url":null,"abstract":"The United States is known for valuing personal independence and individualism. With such societal values, would the American people respond to the coronavirus pandemic by complying with quarantines, social distancing, and other measures in which group interests are placed ahead of individual ones? With a relatively small number of exceptions, the American people, including health care providers, have demonstrated an extraordinary degree of community-oriented behavior. Unfortunately, a lack of public health preparedness and a series of blunders by elected officials have increased the peril for all Americans.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133694713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Legal and Policy Interventions to Address Social Isolation","authors":"J. Hodge, Erica N. White, C. M. Reeves","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3551531","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3551531","url":null,"abstract":"Americans suffer from an epidemic of loneliness stemming from perceived or actual social isolation (SI). Multi-faceted causes warrant novel public health legal responses to reduce significant impacts of SI on physical and mental health.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129893344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Revisiting Legal Foundations of Crisis Standards of Care","authors":"J. Hodge","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3501693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3501693","url":null,"abstract":"James G. Hodge, Jr. In 2009 the novel influenza strain H1N1 (a.k.a. swine flu) raged across the globe presenting unknown risks to populations.1 Initial public concerns were heightened by early reports of potential untimely casualties and long-term morbidity. Fortunately these fears did not fully materialize. Yet, the oft-repeated specter of rapid global migration of viral, infectious diseases like H1N1, West Nile,2 Ebola,3 Zika,4 and COVID have cumulatively generated crises mentalities among health care workers (HCWs) and within health care systems. Substantial national and regional preparedness activities since 9/11 exposed additional vulnerabilities to public health catastrophes. High on the list of concerns was a recognized lack of affirmative, consistent standards of care to employ in emergencies.5 In a true crisis, HCWs and entities would essentially have to “wing it” in regards to allocating scarce resources and providing critical treatment. In response, the Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) requested the Institute of Medicine (now part of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM)) to promulgate initial guidance on standards of care to use in public health crises.6 As a member of the original NASEM committee, our essential goal was not to espouse definitive standards of care for HCWs to deploy. Rather, we sought to provide guiding principles and templates for public and private sectors to consider in planning for large scale, emergency events.7 The committee dispatched prior terminology focused on “altered standards of care.”8 A new term, “crisis standard of care” (CSC), was framed and defined generally as a “substantial change in usual healthcare operations and the level of care ...resulting from a pervasive or catastrophic disaster.”9 Since its inception, most states and many localities are generating an array of CSC plans with federal or other financial support.10 American hospitals and other providers implement CSC following natural disasters, emerging infectious diseases, and mass casualty events (MCEs).11 Consequently, they face a slate of legal and policy issues (e.g., emergency declarations, access, allocations, liability risks/protections, authority, licensure, scope of practice, reimbursements, disabled/special needs populations) chronicled previously by NASEM’s committee.12 Absent resolution (often in realtime), these issues can stymie CSC implementation when time is of the essence. Lives may be lost and injuries suffered unnecessarily due solely to law or policy barriers during crises like COVID. On November 21-22, 2019, NASEM convened a workshop in Washington, DC in light of the 10th anniversary of its original CSC report.13 Participants assessed the successes of CSC implementation as well as manifold challenges in law, ethics, and policy. From these discussions emerged two overriding, compelling law/policy questions: (1) what is the appro","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122411381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"To What Extent Does the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Apply to Citizen Scientist-Led Health Research with Mobile Devices?","authors":"E. Dove, Jiahong Chen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3473880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3473880","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we consider the possible application of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) to “citizen scientist”-led health research with mobile devices. We argue that the GDPR likely does cover this activity, depending on the specific context and the territorial scope. Remaining open questions that result from our analysis lead us to call for lex specialis that would provide greater clarity and certainty regarding the processing of health data by for research purposes, including these non-traditional researchers.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122776764","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessing the Thin Regulation of Consumer-Facing Health Technologies","authors":"N. Terry","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3468480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3468480","url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses the data protection and product safety regulatory models currently applied to consumer-facing health technologies. It explains how the design and structures of existing data protection and safety regulation in the U.S. have resulted in exceptionally thin protection for the users of consumer-facing devices and products that rely on or that facilitate consumer collection or aggregation of health and wellness data. It also examines some appealing legislative alternatives to the current thin model used in the U.S. and suggests a framework for prioritizing ameliorative regulation. To better understand existing regulatory models, their deficiencies, and how they should be reformed, the article employs an analytical model describing these regulatory systems across two axes. The vertical axis describes the quantity or depth of regulation, such as, for example, the strictness of the rules imposed by the regulatory model. The horizontal axis describes the reach of the regulation, the behaviors, products, or industries to which the regulation applies.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"20 16","pages":"102 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141227577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Law and Economics of Grindr: A Response to Carson","authors":"Jonathan Hardman","doi":"10.1177/1073110519876178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110519876178","url":null,"abstract":"In the Winter 2017 edition of JLME, Dr. Carson outlined an economic approach to the epidemiology of HIV transmission within the gay community, with a special emphasis on mobile apps. His conclusion is that HIV transmission amongst the gay community constitutes a collective action problem, which is resolved by the social norm of using a condom. This article critiques Dr. Carson's approach from an economic perspective. By utilizing classic law and economic theory, this article will argue that HIV transmission may not, in fact, constitute a collective action problem in economic terms, and that instead condom use as a method of disease protection in theory can arise from purely rational, market driven actions. To do so, it borrows from transactional theory of information asymmetry to show the potential to alert counterparts as to serostatus. This conclusion provides an important supplement to Carson: rather than social norms being the core driver in condom usage to prevent HIV, instead condom use may arise solely as a result of rational, private decision making arising from market signaling. The article then critiques its own findings to demonstrate that it is unclear whether Carson's argument or the argument in this paper is, indeed, correct — which may represent a limitation in the analytical techniques advanced.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"214 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123275139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Challenges and Opportunities for Biomarker Validation","authors":"S. Hey, E. D’Andrea, E. Jung, Frazer A. Tessema, Jing Luo, B. Gyawali, A. Kesselheim","doi":"10.1177/1073110519876162","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110519876162","url":null,"abstract":"Biomarkers can be powerful tools to guide diagnosis, treatment, and research. However, prudent use of bio-markers requires formal validation efforts. Although the data needed for biomarker validation has traditionally been hard to access, new research initiatives can ease this process.","PeriodicalId":323786,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics","volume":"121 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121527346","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}