Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics最新文献

Medical legal partnerships address individual legal needs that can create impediments to health. Little is known about outcomes from medical legal partnerships and their relationship to access to justice. This paper reports outcomes from one medical legal partnership from the perspective of the client, with specific emphasis on impact on health and concepts related to access to justice. We suggest a conceptual model for incorporating medical legal partnerships into a broader framework about access to justice.

As a legal aid union president in New Haven, laboring within shouting distance of a different large research university, I recall how our membership rolled our eyes when Professors Greiner, Pattanayak, and Hennesy of Harvard published their study providing evidence, through a randomized control trial, that law clinic housing work made no difference for clients.¹ Representing, as I was, "lawyers, secretaries, and paralegals who have dedicated their careers to serving poor clients in crisis,"² the authors' conclusion generated first shock, then denial, and then an anxious realization that somebody's job was to research and disseminate such conclusions. In a 2013 United States where there was one legal aid lawyer for every 8,893 people who qualified,³ where federal Legal Services Corporation funding had dropped 40% over ten years in real dollars,⁴ and in an America that spends as much on Halloween costumes for its pets as it does legal aid for the poor,⁵ the inquiry felt like a pile-on. It made no more sense to us than asking if a teacher is "good for students," a nurse "good for the sick," or a chef "good for the hungry."⁶.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are effective for treating obesity, but the high cost of these medications endangers the financial viability of our health care system. To ensure that these drugs are available to Medicare beneficiaries, pharmaceutical manufacturers must lower their prices.

Law is a critical determinant of health that public health practitioners encounter in everyday practice. Yet most do not receive any formal public health law training. This article discusses tangible opportunities for strengthening the capacity of current and future practitioners to leverage law to advance health equity priorities.

Public health authorities (PHAs), including Tribal nations, have the right and responsibility to protect and promote the health of their citizens. Although Tribal nations have the same need and legal authority to access public health data as any other PHA, significant legal challenges continue to impede Tribal data access.

The end of the federal COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) on May 11, 2023, marked a pivotal shift in the landscape of telehealth regulation in the US. Kwan, Jolin, and Shachar analyze the implications of this transition by exposing inconsistencies in access to care. We agree that we now face a "convoluted patchwork of permanent and temporary changes to telehealth law and policy."¹.

Over the past two decades there has been a rapid expansion in our understanding of how human genetic variability impacts susceptibility and severity of disease. Through applications of genome-wide association studies, genome and exome sequencing, researchers have made thousands of discoveries of genetic variants that impact risk of common and rare disorders affecting millions of people. Although these techniques have been primarily applied to highly prevalent chronic disorders such as diabetes¹ and cardiovascular disease², infectious diseases have proven to not be immune to genome-wide association, with studies of Tuberculosis³, HIV⁴ and SARS-CoV2⁵, to name but a few, identifying host susceptibility loci across the genome. Unlike non-communicable diseases, infectious diseases have the unique element of impacting not only the affected the host, but those who may be most vulnerable to acquiring the infection. Thus, genetic variants that impact one individual's susceptibility to and severity of an infection may also have broader implications to public health, as was brought into keen focus during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, as we begin to apply the knowledge gained from genomic studies in the clinic or into policy, there are unique ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) at the intersection of infectious diseases and human genomics. In this issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, Jose et al attempt to address this need by proposing a research agenda for ELSI studies at what they term the "blurred boundaries" of infectious and genetic diseases.⁶.

Georgia State University College of Law Professor Emerita Charity Scott quoted these words from Albert Einstein in June of 2022 as she concluded a tribute to Professor Joseph (Jay) M. Healey, one of the founding lights of health law and health law teaching. She chose the quote because she thought the words and sentiment would resonate with Jay. I repeat it because Dr. Einstein's words capture the essence and heart of Charity's approach to teaching, pedagogy, and life. Charity modeled, urged, nudged, and taught the community of health law professors to embrace imagination and creativity. Charity's vision has helped us be more creative and reflective teachers.².

This true story of a mediation in a personal injury lawsuit describes a sequence of events and fairly common practices that raise significant questions about mediation ethics as well as attorney ethics.