通过立法改革促进安全就医--澳大利亚的经验。

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Journal of Law and Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-01
Tania Penovic, Ronli Sifris
{"title":"通过立法改革促进安全就医--澳大利亚的经验。","authors":"Tania Penovic, Ronli Sifris","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The realisation of the right to health is vulnerable to the interventions of strangers, acting on the belief that certain health care should not be permissible under the law or accessible in practice. In Australia, the key arena for such interventions has been abortion services. Drawing on empirical research undertaken by the authors, this article examines the impact of these interventions and the effectiveness of \"safe access zone\" laws that now operate nationwide to constrain them. After examining the unsuccessful constitutional challenge to these laws in the High Court of Australia, it considers whether safe access zones may have utility in other health care contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"31 1","pages":"185-200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Facilitating Safe Access to Health Care through Legislative Reform - The Australian Experience.\",\"authors\":\"Tania Penovic, Ronli Sifris\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The realisation of the right to health is vulnerable to the interventions of strangers, acting on the belief that certain health care should not be permissible under the law or accessible in practice. In Australia, the key arena for such interventions has been abortion services. Drawing on empirical research undertaken by the authors, this article examines the impact of these interventions and the effectiveness of \\\"safe access zone\\\" laws that now operate nationwide to constrain them. After examining the unsuccessful constitutional challenge to these laws in the High Court of Australia, it considers whether safe access zones may have utility in other health care contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"185-200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

健康权的实现很容易受到陌生人干预的影响,因为他们认为某些医疗服务是法律所不允许的,或者在实践中是无法获得的。在澳大利亚,此类干预的主要领域是堕胎服务。本文利用作者进行的实证研究,探讨了这些干预的影响,以及目前在全国范围内实施的 "安全准入区 "法律对这些干预的限制效果。在研究了澳大利亚高等法院对这些法律提出的宪法挑战未获成功后,文章考虑了安全准入区在其他医疗保健领域是否有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Facilitating Safe Access to Health Care through Legislative Reform - The Australian Experience.

The realisation of the right to health is vulnerable to the interventions of strangers, acting on the belief that certain health care should not be permissible under the law or accessible in practice. In Australia, the key arena for such interventions has been abortion services. Drawing on empirical research undertaken by the authors, this article examines the impact of these interventions and the effectiveness of "safe access zone" laws that now operate nationwide to constrain them. After examining the unsuccessful constitutional challenge to these laws in the High Court of Australia, it considers whether safe access zones may have utility in other health care contexts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊最新文献
Challenging Pandemic Law: From Vaccine Mandates to Judicial Review of Vaccine Approvals. Cystic Fibrosis and the Law: The Ramifications of New Treatments. Denial of Desire for Death in Dementia: Why Is Dementia Excluded from Australian Voluntary Assisted Dying Legislation? Informed Consent and the Duty to Warn: More than the Mere Provision of Information. Insight and the Capacity to Refuse Treatment with Electroconvulsive Therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1