{"title":"How best to regulate voluntary assisted dying: a qualitative study of perceptions of Australian doctors and regulators.","authors":"Ben P White, Casey M Haining, Lindy Willmott","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae045","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae045","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is widely accepted that voluntary assisted dying (VAD) should be regulated but little is known about the most effective way to regulate doctors in this setting. This article reports on empirical research conducted in two Australian states where VAD is lawful (Victoria and Western Australia). Interviews were conducted with 92 participants: one group comprised doctors providing VAD and the other group was regulators in this field. Participants were asked about how best to regulate doctors providing this service. Strikingly, both regulator and doctor participant groups were consistent with each other in their views on what constituted effective regulation. The nature of VAD was perceived by participants to require special regulation, although some felt this was overdone in these states. Reported features of effective regulation included regulators taking an educative approach, regulation being perceived as acceptable by doctors, and it being responsive and nimble to provide the guidance that doctors need. Participants also considered a range of regulatory tools were required to regulate VAD effectively, and some identified a need for these tools to be employed together in a holistic way. This article concludes with a set of principles for effective regulation of VAD, discerned from the views of participants.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11793166/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143191090","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Public Mental Health Framework: thinking about law as preventive medicine.","authors":"Kay E Wilson","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf002","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf002","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health, mental health, and well-being are not 'natural' but are shaped by social and environmental factors. This article aims to reorient the development of all laws and policies to do more to prevent mental ill-health and promote well-being as a core function of the contemporary state. It introduces a new conceptual and empirical model, the Public Mental Health Framework, based on three areas of research: (i) the social determinants of health and mental health, which include social structures and daily living conditions (such as poverty, inequality, education, employment, discrimination, adverse childhood experiences, and crime); (ii) health and human rights; and (iii) the intermediate social model of disability. It then explains how the Public Mental Health Framework can be incorporated into law and policy development through parliamentary analysis similar to that used for 'statements of compatibility' in the Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) and legislation such as the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 (Wales), interdepartmental administrative structures, proactive strategic planning, and continued advocacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11772858/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143053946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Harnessing deliberative regulation to address inequities in accessing healthcare services in England.","authors":"Sabrina Germain, Gianluca Veronesi","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae042","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae042","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>System-level decisions around the commissioning and provision of healthcare services in England have contributed to barriers in accessing the National Health Service. In this article, we ask how to better regulate resource allocation to ensure greater equity in access to healthcare services. First, we focus on the Health and Care Act 2022, which, drawing on principles of deliberative regulation to address health inequalities, initiates a shift away from previous regulatory approaches towards a collaborative decision-making model. We then shed light on the systemic factors creating and maintaining access barriers by considering shortcomings in previous regulatory approaches. With these in mind, we consider whether deliberative regulation-providing communities with resources to create normative solutions to intrinsic issues-could help address these systemic challenges. To assess the potential of laws or policies to achieve greater equity in healthcare, we also introduce an evaluative framework based on deliberative principles. We apply this framework to a case study of an Integrated Care System to gauge the extent to which the Health and Care Act 2022 has indeed been effectively adopting a deliberative approach by intentionally engaging marginalized communities in decision-making and devising accountability mechanisms for the allocation of healthcare resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142899606","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Breaking vaccination barriers among migrants? Human rights and crisis preparedness.","authors":"Yana Litins'ka","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf004","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf004","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vaccination hesitancy is one of the critical threats to public health. The coronavirus disease pandemic reconfirmed that certain groups of populations are more reluctant to vaccinate than others, particularly migrants. This article examines legal obligations related to protecting the right to health in addressing vaccination barriers among newly arrived adult migrants, taking Ukrainians granted temporary protection as an example. From human rights law requirements delineated by the United Nations and Council of Europe, it maps out a framework of vaccination-related obligations. Furthermore, the article tests the framework created in one national legal system-Sweden-to show where the gaps in transposing obligations into national law still exist. To deepen the analysis, the interview study with Ukrainian refugees in Sweden is presented, which allows reflection on what obligations have not reached their recipients and resulted in vaccination barriers. The article advocates for further specification of obligations related to vaccinations in both national and international laws for better crisis preparedness.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11805342/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143371455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Saying 'I'm sorry' at the bedside: when and why should apologies following medical mishaps be protected from legal liability?","authors":"Shin Wei Sim, Lalit Kumar Radha Krishna, Gerard Porter","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwaf011","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patients harmed by medical mishaps are often driven to litigation because of a lack of apologies and candour rather than a desire for monetary compensation. Despite attempts at clinical negligence reform, patients continue to receive unsatisfactory responses. Physicians have cited fears of legal liability as a key reason for withholding apologies. Apology legislation has been proposed as a possible solution to encourage apologies by rendering them inadmissible as evidence of liability, thereby reducing the legal risks of apologies. Critics, however, contend that apology legislation may encourage strategic formulaic responses instead of compassionate patient-centred support. This article delivers a comprehensive rejoinder to these concerns, and argues that bold legislative change similar to that of Hong Kong's enactment of full apology protection aligns with English and Welsh clinical negligence reform goals. Through a robust comparative legal analysis of various jurisdictions in which apology laws have been enacted, this article explores the legal, ethical, and practical factors that contribute to the proper functioning of such laws. It then recommends concrete ways to improve the effectiveness of such laws in the context of clinical negligence reform, thereby removing barriers to apologetic discourse and breathing ethical and professional life into the doctor's apology.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143617692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Mental health and capacity laws in Northern Ireland: examining the position of children and young people.","authors":"Anne-Maree Farrell, Elizabeth Agnew, Patrick Hann","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae038","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae038","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mental health and capacity laws applicable to children and young people in Northern Ireland (NI) lack clarity and coherence, with significant gaps in service provision and safeguarding. Drawing on an examination of such laws, we argue that law reform is needed. In the short term, we suggest there is merit in publishing statutory guidance, such as a Code of Practice, to address both the issue of evolving capacity in children and to facilitate best practice in policy and practice. This modest reform in the short term should be accompanied by a firm political commitment to ensuring that NI's innovative fusion mental capacity legislation is fully brought into force in the medium term. Meanwhile, law reform should form part of a holistic approach on the part of NI's policy-makers towards improving mental healthcare provision for children and young people in line with a human rights-based approach. This would include the following: increased allocation of funding and resources to facilitate more timely access to suitable treatment and related services; enhancing participation in policy, judicial, and clinical decision-making that impacts their lives; and employing a range of executive accountability mechanisms to drive improvements in such provision over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11706788/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142511320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Future challenges for UK regulation of brain organoid research.","authors":"Emily Jackson","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae047","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae047","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One of this century's most dramatic scientific developments is the reprogramming of stem cells in order to create organoids, that is, self-organizing 3D models that mimic the structure and function of human organs. This article considers whether brain organoids in particular might raise any new questions for law, now or in the near future. If complex human brain organoids were to become capable of consciousness or sentience, the current regulation of human tissue research, which protects the interests of tissue donors, might need to be supplemented in order to protect the interests of the tissue itself. Human brain organoids can also be implanted into animal hosts, and if this were to result in animals with significantly enhanced cognitive abilities, additional protective measures might become necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142899615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A common law power to dissect: a medico-legal history.","authors":"Joshua Shaw","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf006","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf006","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Some jurists claimed there was a common law power to dissect the human body prior to and outside of the Anatomy Act 1832. That power formed part of the privileges of physicians, surgeons, and apothecaries, and, accordingly, the common law to the extent it recognized those privileges. It is best evidenced in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries-most authoritatively by the Court of Queen's Bench in R v Price in 1884, the Québec Superior Court in Phillips v Montreal General Hospital in 1908, and the reasons of the inquiry into the conduct Dr William Ramsay Smith in 1903, but also in the comments of writers in law manuals until the mid-twentieth century. The existence of a common law power to dissect challenges narratives ordinarily told about the history of anatomy law specifically and the law of the dead generally. The power may also still exist if legislation in a jurisdiction has not displaced or substantially altered it. Through medico-legal history, the author argues that the medical lawyer can benefit from re-examining old doctrines. Heterodox elements in old doctrines suggest alternative possibilities for the law, allowing medical law's histories to be retold.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11825383/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143415934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Parental autonomy and children's health: a patriarchal dilemma in the Middle East, with particular emphasis on Kuwait.","authors":"Bashayer Al Majed","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwaf007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwaf007","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 2020, Kuwaiti mothers won legal medical guardianship over their children, enabling them to authorize medical treatment, this despite still not having autonomy for their own medical care, yet being vicariously liable for potential tort caused by their child. This dichotomy raises questions over the implementation of the new legislation, if the mother and the male guardian had opposing views over the child's health. Recent years have seen the UK cases of Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans initiate passionate ethical debate when courts invoked Parens Patriae, superseding parental autonomy and supporting clinicians' decisions to withdraw life support. Middle Eastern courts tend to support parental decisions; however, strict civil laws exist regarding the continuation and cessation of life support. This article examines the patriarchal culture in the Middle East and explores whether a Kuwaiti mother's medical autonomy would be upheld in the event of a parental dispute over their child's treatment and end-of-life care, within the framework of the Kuwaiti Civil Code No. 67 of 1980. The article concludes that matriarchal guardianship would likely be undermined; however, legislative changes are the first step and advances in palliative care across the Middle East are introducing a changing culture towards open parental discussions and shared decision-making, slowly making the mother's decisive voice a part of the norm.</p>","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143494373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Guy's and St Thomas'-v-Knight [2021] EWHC 25: Dignity in English law.","authors":"Melanie J Weismann","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae027","DOIUrl":"10.1093/medlaw/fwae027","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":" ","pages":"549-557"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141767769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}