Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics最新文献

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a significant health threat to people in corrections facilities due to communal living, inability to social distance, and high rates of comorbidity among incarcerated populations. Combined with the First Step Act of 2018, which granted incarcerated individuals seeking compassionate release access to the courts, the pandemic increased the number of people in federal prisons petitioning for early release due to health risk. Analysis of federal compassionate release case law throughout the pandemic reveals inconsistent judicial reasoning related to COVID-19-based requests. Inconsistently interpreted compassionate release factors include vaccination status, COVID-19 reinfection, and the "degree" of extraordinary circumstances considered. Varied application among federal districts produced inequitable access to compassionate release. Therefore, this analysis provides insight into how an unclear policy can create disparate public health outcomes and considerations for compassionate release determinations in future times of uncertainty, such as a pandemic.

Researchers, academic institutions, and journals have an ethical obligation to correct the research record expeditiously and publicly to maintain the integrity of science.

Reflections on Claire O'Callaghan and Brendan Parent's article "Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment and Organ Donation After Circulatory Death: Consequences of Legislative Separation."

This reflection considers the contribution of Prof Larry Gostin to global health law and the lessons for climate action.

In longer-form writing with Larry Gostin, especially on global health, I have been particularly struck by how careful he is not to lose the narrative voice, especially of the vulnerable. He truly believes that these stories are "on loan" to us, and that there is an almost holy reverence and devotion we owe to the lives of those whose stories we tell.

Communities and individuals globally continue to suffer the violent impacts of colonialism and racism, in a global system of governance that remains rooted in unequal and hierarchical power imbalances. The interpersonal, societal, and structural violence that persists around the world exists in violation of human rights, and is evidence of a persistent lack of political will to effectively invest in human rights, including the right to health, as a true priority.The demand on States and non-State actors to fulfil the human right to health is imperative. Attacks on civilians during times of conflict and catastrophe, as seen in the latest escalation and display of imperial aggression by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory, demonstrate the consistent uneven application of human rights and commitment to fulfilling them.Protecting human rights, and specifically the realization of the right to health, is fundamental as it has significant consequences for the realisation of other human rights. Eliminating discrimination requires paying sufficient attention to groups of individuals that suffer historical or persistent prejudice. Fulfilling a commitment to health equity and justice demands creating opportunity and conducive conditions for the dignity for all people.

Over the last three years, Larry Gostin, I, and many others have urged world leaders to open their minds toward specific subsets of reform in the interest of pandemic response, including mechanisms for transparency, accountability, and, crucially, financial buy-in. With negotiations for a new pandemic accord still incomplete, our focus must remain on reaching global agreement, and keeping at top of mind the immense stakes if that is not possible.

The tenth anniversary of the publication of Lawrence Gostin's seminal treatise Global Health Law affords us the opportunity to reflect on his enduring legacy as a preeminent scholar, and one of the field's founding thought leaders.

On June 1, 2024, the World Health Assembly reached consensus on a package of amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR). These amendments follow nearly two decades of implementation and an intensive multilateral process prompted by the global struggle against COVID-19. This article critically examines whether the amended IHR reflect lessons learned from the pandemic, potentially ushering in a new era for global health law in pandemic preparedness and response, or if they deflect attention from the need for deeper structural reforms. While the IHR remain the only near-universal legal framework for preventing and addressing the international spread of disease, these amendments emphasize equity and solidarity, and potentially shift the IHR from a technical instrument to one focusing on inherently political issues. This analysis examines key IHR amendments and their implications for the future of global health law, particularly in the context of equity, financing, and implementation.

In "Everything is Tuberculosis," author John Green assesses the intricacies of the communicable condition, TB, as a source of significant morbidity and mortality globally over centuries. Despite available vaccines, treatments, and protocols, tens of millions are infected and over a million persons will die from TB in 2025 alone. In searching for answers to mitigate this global scourge, however, Green looks past a key factor - specifically the role of law - as a primary tool for prevention and control.