露西系列:制度阴影下的自由剥夺

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q1 LAW Medical Law Review Pub Date : 2022-08-10 DOI:10.1093/medlaw/fwac029
R. Reed-Berendt
{"title":"露西系列:制度阴影下的自由剥夺","authors":"R. Reed-Berendt","doi":"10.1093/medlaw/fwac029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"people’s autonomy and privacy, for equality, and for public health.’ Following the publication of this book, the FDA has since removed the in-person dispensing requirement which allowed the pills to be provided by mail in thirty-one states, thereby allowing pregnant persons to access TEMA services for the first time in the USA. However, this access may be under threat following the revocation of the constitutional right to abortion when Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022. Examining the trajectory of TEMA access—or lack thereof—within these jurisdictions, the authors clearly identify that the nature of abortion policy in the UK and USA is driven by politics rather than by medical evidence. As such, this trend has created socio-legal barriers to accessing TEMA services in these jurisdictions even during and in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. As a clear example of this, the authors highlight that the home use of misoprostol has long been available for the treatment of spontaneous miscarriage in the UK, and yet prior to 2018 this medication could only be provided under medical supervision for induced miscarriage. As the authors indicate, this rule was surely not based on clinical evidence but was more likely to be politically motivated. The specificity of this topic and the level of technical detail included within the book preclude it from being light reading material for a reader who does not have a direct interest in abortion access. Nevertheless, this is an essential read for those—especially academics, medical professionals, and policymakers—seeking a comprehensive understanding of the benefits of TEMA, the current access to these services in the UK and USA, and how access may be expanded by displacing legal and practical barriers in these jurisdictions.","PeriodicalId":49146,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law Review","volume":"30 1","pages":"757 - 762"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lucy Series, Deprivation of Liberty in the Shadows of the Institution\",\"authors\":\"R. Reed-Berendt\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/medlaw/fwac029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"people’s autonomy and privacy, for equality, and for public health.’ Following the publication of this book, the FDA has since removed the in-person dispensing requirement which allowed the pills to be provided by mail in thirty-one states, thereby allowing pregnant persons to access TEMA services for the first time in the USA. However, this access may be under threat following the revocation of the constitutional right to abortion when Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022. Examining the trajectory of TEMA access—or lack thereof—within these jurisdictions, the authors clearly identify that the nature of abortion policy in the UK and USA is driven by politics rather than by medical evidence. As such, this trend has created socio-legal barriers to accessing TEMA services in these jurisdictions even during and in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. As a clear example of this, the authors highlight that the home use of misoprostol has long been available for the treatment of spontaneous miscarriage in the UK, and yet prior to 2018 this medication could only be provided under medical supervision for induced miscarriage. As the authors indicate, this rule was surely not based on clinical evidence but was more likely to be politically motivated. The specificity of this topic and the level of technical detail included within the book preclude it from being light reading material for a reader who does not have a direct interest in abortion access. Nevertheless, this is an essential read for those—especially academics, medical professionals, and policymakers—seeking a comprehensive understanding of the benefits of TEMA, the current access to these services in the UK and USA, and how access may be expanded by displacing legal and practical barriers in these jurisdictions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Law Review\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"757 - 762\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwac029\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwac029","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

人民的自主和隐私、平等和公共卫生。“在这本书出版后,FDA已经取消了允许在31个州通过邮件提供药丸的亲自分发要求,从而允许孕妇首次在美国获得TEMA服务。”然而,在2022年6月罗伊诉韦德案被推翻后,堕胎的宪法权利被撤销,这种权利可能受到威胁。在这些司法管辖范围内检查TEMA获取或缺乏的轨迹,作者清楚地认识到,英国和美国堕胎政策的本质是由政治而不是由医学证据驱动的。因此,即使在全球COVID-19大流行限制期间和之后,这一趋势也为在这些司法管辖区获得TEMA服务造成了社会法律障碍。作为一个明显的例子,作者强调,在英国,米索前列醇的家庭使用长期以来一直可用于治疗自发性流产,但在2018年之前,这种药物只能在医学监督下用于引导性流产。正如作者所指出的,这一规则肯定不是基于临床证据,而更有可能是出于政治动机。这个主题的特殊性和技术细节的水平,包括在书中排除了它从一个读者谁没有直接的兴趣堕胎访问轻松的阅读材料。然而,对于那些寻求全面了解TEMA的好处、目前在英国和美国获得这些服务的途径,以及如何通过消除这些司法管辖区的法律和实践障碍来扩大这些服务的途径的人来说,这是一本必不可少的读物,尤其是学者、医疗专业人士和政策制定者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Lucy Series, Deprivation of Liberty in the Shadows of the Institution
people’s autonomy and privacy, for equality, and for public health.’ Following the publication of this book, the FDA has since removed the in-person dispensing requirement which allowed the pills to be provided by mail in thirty-one states, thereby allowing pregnant persons to access TEMA services for the first time in the USA. However, this access may be under threat following the revocation of the constitutional right to abortion when Roe v Wade was overturned in June 2022. Examining the trajectory of TEMA access—or lack thereof—within these jurisdictions, the authors clearly identify that the nature of abortion policy in the UK and USA is driven by politics rather than by medical evidence. As such, this trend has created socio-legal barriers to accessing TEMA services in these jurisdictions even during and in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. As a clear example of this, the authors highlight that the home use of misoprostol has long been available for the treatment of spontaneous miscarriage in the UK, and yet prior to 2018 this medication could only be provided under medical supervision for induced miscarriage. As the authors indicate, this rule was surely not based on clinical evidence but was more likely to be politically motivated. The specificity of this topic and the level of technical detail included within the book preclude it from being light reading material for a reader who does not have a direct interest in abortion access. Nevertheless, this is an essential read for those—especially academics, medical professionals, and policymakers—seeking a comprehensive understanding of the benefits of TEMA, the current access to these services in the UK and USA, and how access may be expanded by displacing legal and practical barriers in these jurisdictions.
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
Medical Law Review
Medical Law Review MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Law Review is established as an authoritative source of reference for academics, lawyers, legal and medical practitioners, law students, and anyone interested in healthcare and the law. The journal presents articles of international interest which provide thorough analyses and comment on the wide range of topical issues that are fundamental to this expanding area of law. In addition, commentary sections provide in depth explorations of topical aspects of the field.
期刊最新文献
Towards a rights-based approach for disabled women's access to abortion. Addressing the consequences of the corporatization of reproductive medicine. Guy's and St Thomas'-v-Knight [2021] EWHC 25: Dignity in English law. Donor conception, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, choices, and procedural justice: an argument for reform of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Anticipatory declarations in obstetric care: a relational and spatial examination of patient empowerment, institutional impacts and temporal challenges.
×
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