Journal of Law and Medicine最新文献

In April 2020 American President Donald Trump publicly stated that consuming disinfectant could cure COVID-19. This apparently shocking statement was not so shocking to many: some people believe that consuming Miracle Mineral Solution (MMS), a name for chlorine dioxide, an industrial bleach, can cure many illnesses. This article is a case note about Stanley v Finnegan, 447 F Supp 3d 771, 777 (WD Ark, 2020), in which parents sued their local county and sheriff in Arkansas for taking their children away after they encouraged their children to consume MMS. This case is particularly important in the current COVID-19 world.

The relationship between exposure to toxins at work and lung diseases continues to be significantly under-recognised in Australia. Medical practitioners are well placed to identify occupational risk factors for disease. They can therefore play a vital role in informing regulatory responses, highlighting dangerous workplaces and supporting access to compensation to assist with better health outcomes for their patients. Increased awareness among medical practitioners of occupational factors can aid early diagnosis and improve patient outcomes by improving access to justice. Medical practitioners should be cognisant of the occupational causes of lung disease in Australia to support appropriate specialist referral and ensure patients can access additional support systems available through legal compensation systems. More broadly, medical professionals and lawyers assisting workers share the common aim of highlighting preventable diseases and advocating for change to help make workplaces safer.

This section examines the 2022 decision of Pridgeon v Medical Council of New South Wales in the New South Wales Court of Appeal that has taken a fundamentally different view of the public interest test employed in immediate action hearings under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law. The section starts by examining the case and then looks at the approach taken by subsequent decisions. It will argue that the decision is substantially at odds with earlier authorities from all around Australia and fails to understand properly the meaning and purpose of the test.

Since the 1970s, the zoonotic disease monkeypox was reported as appearing in humans, principally in central and west Africa. However, from May 2022, escalating numbers of persons worldwide contracted it. On 23 July 2022, the World Health Organization declared this outbreak to be a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) and initially observed that it was "concentrated among men who have sex with men, especially those with multiple sexual partners." The international public health response to monkeypox provides a litmus test to evaluate whether lessons have been learned from experiences of other infectious diseases in recent decades. This editorial identifies evidence of progress in the following areas: the declaration of a PHEIC in relation to monkeypox; some high-income countries' responses to monkeypox; naming of the virus, its variants and the disease it causes; protection of LGBTIQ+ communities and engagement of them to curb transmission of monkeypox; and efforts to ensure access to equitable vaccines.

Voluntary assisted dying laws have now been enacted in all six Australian States with reform being considered in the remaining two. While there is an emerging body of literature examining various aspects of regulation, there has been scant consideration of what these reforms mean for First Nations peoples, and to what extent their experiences have been considered in the process of developing legislation. This article provides a critical analysis of how Indigenous perspectives both contributed to, and were engaged with, during the law reform processes in Victoria and Western Australia, the first two States to grapple with this topic. Findings reveal the sophistication in how Indigenous organisations and individuals engaged with this issue and highlight the critical importance of not universalising Indigenous perspectives. Significantly, there was much greater engagement with Indigenous views in Western Australia than in Victoria. We conclude by considering how Indigenous voices can meaningfully influence Australian law reform processes.

Abortion and voluntary assisted dying (VAD) are areas of health care that elicit passionate and emotional responses. As a result of the diverse perspectives relating to these forms of medical care, Australian law allows for conscientious objection in both contexts. This article considers the role of conscientious objection in health care in Australia, with a particular focus on abortion and VAD. In begins by considering the legal position, highlighting some of the key differences in the way that conscientious objection is regulated in these two contexts and between Australian jurisdictions. It observes that jurisdictions which have legalised both abortion and VAD have not necessarily adopted the same approach to the question of conscientious objection as it pertains to abortion versus VAD. The article then turns to consider the reality of conscientious objection "on the ground" across these two domains in an effort to understand this distinction.

The coronial jurisdiction is different in function, character and procedure to most other legal processes in Australia, being inquisitorial rather than adversarial. It is also, by virtue of its focus on the circumstances of death, situated at the intersection of trauma and grief on the one hand, and legal exploration and evidence-gathering, on the other. For families a coronial investigation offers the potential for resolution about a death, but it can also exacerbate grief and trauma, particularly in the public forum of an inquest. This article utilises interviews with legal professionals engaged in the coronial jurisdiction to explore their understanding of the issues that impact upon families during a death investigation. Our findings indicate that an ethics of care is evident in the court but that this remains contingent on adequate resourcing of the sector, and that this is increasingly the case as the jurisdiction becomes more specialised.

The potential for adverse consequences of investigations by a regulatory authority into complaints made against a person whom it regulates raises important questions about how regulators or similar bodies are, or should be, held accountable for their actions. This article examines the legal duties or other obligations that a regulator of health practitioners owes to people it regulates as well as to those who make complaints or submit notifications and to the public at large. It raises the general question of what duties or obligations any regulator or similar body with investigatory or coercive powers owes to persons arising out of its investigations. It finds that although they do not have a legal duty of care to a regulatee to protect them from harm, there may be other reasons why a regulator may want to consider the welfare of those whom it regulates as well as other affected parties.

This article undertakes the first comprehensive mapping exercise of the legal regulation of voluntary assisted dying (VAD) in Victoria. Despite the detailed nature of the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 (Vic), this analysis reveals that VAD is also regulated by a diverse array of other law: a further 20 pieces of legislation and 27 broad areas of law. In some instances, this legal regulation beyond the principal VAD legislation is significant for how the VAD system operates in practice. The article then identifies the implications of this mapping exercise for the coherence of the law, focusing in particular on the domains of consistency, comprehensiveness, and completeness. Findings include identifying areas of significant incoherence and the implications of this for law reformers, policymakers, and users of the law, including patients, families, health practitioners, and health service providers.

This section examines recent reforms to the regulatory framework for biologicals contained in the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) in the context of the "New Frontier" of reform envisioned in a report completed by the Commonwealth Government in 2021. It compares Australia's proposed reform of the approval processes for biologicals to similar reforms that have been made over the last three decades in the United States and the European Union. It places the Australian reforms in the context of the commercialisation of regenerative medicine and identifies several potential shortcomings of the proposed reforms and reports on the current lack of data on the processes of expedited approvals in Australia more generally.