Stretching the limits of "rights talk": securing health care entitlements for children

Health care rights by their very nature have to be considered not only in a traditional legal context structured around the ideas of human autonomy but in a new analytical framework based on the notion of human interdependence. "A healthy life depends upon [social] interdependence: the quality of air, water, and sanitation which the [state] maintains for the public good; the quality of one's caring relationships, which are highly correlated to health; [as well as] the quality of health care and support furnished officially by medical institutions and provided informally by family, friends, [and the community]."     

Stretching the limits of "rights talk": securing health care entitlements for children

Health care rights by their very nature have to be considered not only in a traditional legal context structured around the ideas of human autonomy but in a new analytical framework based on the notion of human interdependence. "A healthy life depends upon [social] interdependence: the quality of air, water, and sanitation which the [state] maintains for the public good; the quality of one's caring relationships, which are highly correlated to health; [as well as] the quality of health care and support furnished officially by medical institutions and provided informally by family, friends, [and the community]."     

Devastation in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina as a state crime: social audience reactions

In the 5 years since Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, scholars in many disciplines have speculated on the sources of the widespread devastation. While many of these studies have focused on objective evidence of the violation of human rights following Hurricane Katrina, this study reviews the human rights violations and goes a step further by examining social audience reactions (both victims and the general public) to the government’s response efforts. Relying on Green and Ward’s (Green 2009; Green and Ward Social Justice, 27, 101–115, 2000; 2004) human rights/organizational deviance definition, which sees state crime as human rights violations that result from state organizational deviance, we attempt to provide further evidence of this case as one of state crime. This article presents results from binary logistic regression analyses that assess the likelihood of respondents disapproving of the actions of officials from various levels of government after the hurricane using data from a survey of Hurricane Katrina evacuees completed by The Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University (The Washington Post/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard University 2005) in the weeks after the storm, and data from a special topics ABC News/Washington Post public opinion survey completed in September of 2005 (ABC News/The Washington Post 2006). Key findings in this study include a strong similarity of results across data sets for race, sex, and religion with regards to respondents disapproving responses to the storm devastation at the federal level. A clear majority of respondents in both data sets disapproved of the actions of some level of government, further implying negative audience reactions, and thus the need to recognize the government’s response to Hurricane Katrina as a state crime.     

Medical Marijuana Registries: A Painful Choice?

Though the medical use of marijuana is legal in thirty-three states, it remains illegal under the federal Controlled Substances Act. Any marijuana use can subject individuals to severe criminal and civil penalties under federal law. States that condition patient access and treatment on registration in a state database impose real risks on their citizens. Although many scholars have written about the tension between federal and state treatment of marijuana, this is the first article to examine marijuana patient registry privacy and fundamental rights issues. This article first reviews the relationship between marijuana use and patient treatment, with a focus on health-care and privacy rights under state and federal law. The article then explains how marijuana registries compare to broader patient registries, such as contagious disease and other medical condition patient registries, and the unique issues presented by marijuana patient registries. It then discusses the elevated risk to constitutional, privacy, and fundamental rights that may result if states do not carefully construct marijuana registries. The article concludes by proposing principles for how both states and dispensaries should approach marijuana registries in order to provide health benefits and avoid harm to patients.     

Contesting anticompetitive actions taken in the name of the state: state action immunity and health care markets

The so-called state action doctrine is a judicially created formula for resolving conflicts between federal antitrust policy and state policies that seem to authorize conduct that antitrust law would prohibit. Against the background of recent commentaries by the federal antitrust agencies, this article reviews the doctrine and discusses its application in the health care sector, focusing on the ability of states to immunize anticompetitive actions by state licensing and regulatory boards, hospital medical staffs, and public hospitals, as well as anticompetitive mergers and agreements. Although states are free, as sovereign governments, to restrict competition, the state action doctrine requires that "the state itself" make the decision to do so. Partly on the basis of problems in the political environment, the article criticizes courts for using a mere "foreseeability" test to decide whether a state legislature sufficiently authorized competitors to act in contravention of clear federal policy: "Few things are more foreseeable than that a trade or profession empowered to regulate itself will produce anticompetitive regulations."     

Indigenous Australia and health rights

Over the last decade, there has been a significant shift in public policy in relation to indigenous Australians. The new policy frameworks have been marked by an antipathy towards a policy discourse based on a human rights framework. This has also been associated with a shift from an approach based on "self-determination" to one founded on the idea of "mutual obligation". This article describes these developments in detail and considers the implications for human rights discourse.     

Administrative "health courts" for medical injury claims: the federal constitutional issues

Our article analyzes whether the federal government may constitutionally supplant a traditional system of common-law trials before state judges and juries with new federal institutions designed by statute for compensating victims of medical injuries. Specifically, this article examines the federal constitutional issues raised by various proposals to replace traditional medical malpractice litigation in state courts with a federal system of administrative "health courts." In doing so, we address the following constitutional issues: 1. Is there federal authority to preempt state law (the commerce clause and spending clause issues)? 2. May jurisdiction be created in non-article 3 tribunals, and may claims be decided without trial by jury (the separation of powers and Seventh Amendment issues)? 3. Would pilot programs that require some claims to be pursued in a federal administrative forum while other claimants are left to pursue traditional state tort law remedies be constitutional (the equal protection issue)? The article concludes that a federal compensation system through administrative health courts should be constitutional provided the statute is appropriately drafted and that appropriate factual findings are made concerning the benefits to patients and the public as well as to doctors and their insurers.     

Special report on health care delivery systems. Trends in the integrated delivery of health care and the corporate practice of medicine

The prospects for federal legislation preempting state corporate practice restrictions are unclear. The health care reform bill originally introduced by President Clinton contained a provision that would have preempted "any state law related to the corporate practice of medicine" insofar as it applied to the arrangements between non-fee-for-service health plans and their participating providers. H.R. 3600/S. 1757, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. 1407(b) (1993). Whether and in what form a preemption provision may survive the legislative process and see a Presidential signature remains to be seen. The particular fate of the federal legislation notwithstanding, however, health care executives can nevertheless remain confident that the legal treatment of the "corporate practice" of medicine will continue to be of vital concern as the various forms of health care organizations evolve in the ongoing struggle to deliver quality medicine at affordable prices.     

知识产权国际造法新趋势

在 TRIPs 协议产生后十余年的时间里,知识产权国际造法活动明显加快。在WTO 体制之外,不少国际组织、机构和论坛围绕着如何处理保护知识产权与维护生物多样性、合理开发植物基因资源、促进公共健康、维护人权之间的关系等问题,对 TRIPs 协议所确立的一系列高标准的知识产权规则提出了批判,探讨和制订了一系列软法性质的、倡导人权和维护社会公共利益的知识产权新规则。这些活动打破了 WTO 和 WIPO 在国际法层面上对知识产权立法权的垄断,反映了国际社会对知识产权私权利之外的人权、公共健康等社会权益的日益重视,势必对未来知识产权国际立法和国内立法产生深远影响。     

The Proliferation of Human Rights in Global Health Governance

Human rights play an integral role in the global governance of health. Recently, both structural and normative aspects of human rights have proliferated across multiple levels and within multiple contexts around the world. Human rights proliferation is likely to have a positive impact on the governance of health because it can expand the avenues through which a human rights framework or human rights norms may be used to address and improve health.     

适应与自主之间的德国基本权利教义学——德国国家信息行为的宪法教义学建构

德国联邦宪法法院基于国家信息行为的三方性特征在合宪性审查中采用了偏离自由权三阶审查模式的回应方式:增加了"保障内涵"(Gewhrleistungsgehalt)的审查标准,同时把"侵害"(Eingriff)概念扩展为"损害"(Beeintrchtigung)并以宪法未明文规定的"国家领导任务"(Aufgabe der Staatslei-tung)建构国家信息行为的正当性基础。在观察基本权利教义学结构与面貌变动的基础上明确了:基本权利教义学以提供理性化之法律适用并达成个案之基本权利保障为目的,面对多变的国家行为形式具有开展的弹性与适应变迁的可能性。     

Meanings of terrorism

Terrorism is a notoriously plastic word, depending on user, audience, and political context. This paper focuses on shifts in its meanings since the early 1970s. As federal statutes made terrorism a criminal offense, common usage changed from a broad meaning to one that specified terrorism as a political crime. The argument is that the state shapes meaning and public discourse through law. Peircean semiotics and the semiotic philosophy of Russian linguist Vološinov provide a framework to explore relationships among politics, law, and civil life. Applied to the events of September 11, 2001 such an analysis further allows better understanding of certain interpreters of the September 11 attacks, notably Jean Baudrillard, Jacques Derrida, and Jürgen Habermas.     

基本权利在特类民事行为领域的适用

"特类民事行为"即指与国家公权力有关联的民事行为。它主要适用于给付行政领域,可以分为两种类型:其一,国家以私法主体身份所为的民事行为,具体可以分解为3种形式。该类行为必须受到基本权利的限制,但这仅仅指向于其中的行政私法行为。而且,基本权利对该种行为的适用与对传统高权行政行为的适用不同,前者具有明显的层次性。其二,私人在传统公共行政领域所为的私法行为。该行为属于"公共行政民营化"中的第3种形式,即"实质民营化",主要集中在给付行政领域。该类行为要受到基本权利的约束。而且,应该受到法律保留原则的约束,但是,法律保留原则在该领域的适用和在秩序行政领域的适用具有本质的不同。     

Construction of a policy arena: the case of public health in France

In this article we examine the transformation over the past two decades of public health as a policy arena in France from a backwater of little interest to politicians, bureaucrats, the media, and the public into a central preoccupation of the state. Recent dramatic health crises (the scandal over HIV-contaminated blood, mad cow disease, etc.) have substantially raised the political profile of (and corresponding state investment in) public health in France, offering opportunities and incentives for political actors not traditionally associated with public health to enter the field and challenging more traditional actors to galvanize themselves and compete for this newly attractive policy terrain. We use the occasion of the passage of a public health law in 2004, labeled by its proponents as the "first" public health law in one hundred years, to show how, in a context of national struggle to contain both risks and costs, "public health" -- chameleonlike -- has taken on various meanings and forms to serve highly conflicting political interests.     

Rights-based mental health legislation and the right to be treated

Following the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons with Mental Illness (1991), the Australian Government released the National Mental Health Policy in 1992. Pointedly, the Report of the National Inquiry into the Rights of People with a Mental Illness in 1993 was critical of the failure of a number of Australian jurisdictions to adequately protect the rights of people with mental illness. A subsequent critique of the capacity of mental health law and policy to respond to current and future challenges of community-based care suggested that while Australian legislation and policies may pass human rights scrutiny in principle, there was insufficient focus on the monitoring processes to ensure implementation and adherence to those measures. The new Commonwealth Attorney-General has foreshadowed the development of a Charter of Rights to create a framework for legislators and regulators when drafting legislation to cover "aspirations" such as the recognition of fundamental human rights. However, it is argued that the dilemma of how best to care for and protect those afflicted with mental illness as well as the public who may be affected by violence or offending by those persons with untreated mental illness, will not be resolved by resort to a didactic Charter of Rights, however idealistic or well intentioned.     

Brief for 885 law professors in support of maintaining adherence to the Roe decision

This brief opposes the overturn of "Roe v. Wade" and resists weakening "Roe's central holding" that would allow states to overturn legal abortion. The brief was written for 885 law professors. "Roe" was not a "constitutional aberration," or "an exercise of raw, judicial power." Some members of the Supreme Court seem to think that the state has "an overriding interest" in protecting fetal life. Some Court members have questioned "Roe's" trimester framework. A person's decision to abort should be done privately. If women are not free to choose abortion, they will not have equality. There is an absence of "express rights of privacy and procreational freedom" in the Constitution. "Roe" was 1 instance of the Court's recognition of constitutional rights that are not named explicitly. Historical materials are drawn on to show the link between trends in society and the "judicial recognition of unenumerated rights." The most serious questions about "Roe" deal with its trimester framework. Justice Blackmun's majority opinion said that the 1st trimester of pregnancy was personal. "Roe" said that abortions created a medical risk at the beginning of the 2nd trimester. Therefore, the government was more interested in the health of the mother at that time. The state could then regulate abortion "in ways that are reasonable related to maternal health." The start of the 3rd trimester was when the fetus was viable. The right of a woman to end her pregnancy "offends powerful moral forces." Some of "Roe's" critics had their scientific facts wrong. Medical authorities think Justice O'Connor is mistaken when she says that "Roe" is "on a collision course with itself." The 23rd to 24th week of pregnancies where the fetal organs can "sustain life outside the womb." This has not changed since "Roe" was decided in 1973, nor is it likely to in the future. Some "amici" believe that the state can never have an interest in the fetus. The state can not have an interest in the fetus distinct from the woman who will give birth to it. During previability, restricting a woman's procreational rights would not be scientifically supportable. The state does have an interest in "upholding the value of human life." "Roe" is "within the mainstream" of constitutional jurisprudence and should be reaffirmed.     

No more kidding around: restructuring non-medical childhood immunization exemptions to ensure public health protection

Professor Silverman's article examines the complex challenges faced by U.S. policymakers attempting to balance the public health protections of mandatory childhood immunization programs with the legal, religious, philosophical, and practical concerns raised by permitting non-medical exemptions under the programs. The article begins with a discussion of the history of childhood immunization programs, and continues by describing the inconsistency of enforcement of state immunization laws and exemptions. The author analyzes recent cases from New York, Wyoming, and Arkansas, and discusses how these decisions both pose threats to these programs' public health protections, while also offering insight into potential problems for other state vaccination programs. Professor Silverman concludes by advocating that states adopt an "informed refusal" approach to vaccination exemption as a way of improving immunity protections, while respecting the autonomy rights of those who wish to opt out of the program.     

The conflict between the ethics of th individual and the ethics governing public health: practical sustainability of health care in jeopardy?

The "health rights movement" has reconstructed the clinical relationship between health care workers and patients by simultaneously demanding more from traditional medical care and challenging the perceived power differential between doctors and patients by rejecting the paternalistic medical model in favour of an individual patients' rights model. However, the growth in individual expectations of a right to health care creates a potential conflict with the ethics that prioritise public health and guide the rationing of its limited financial and human capital resources. This, in turn, creates a practical dilemma which requires public health institutions to become service orientated while sacrificing their integral role in training and educating the medical workforce and potentially compromising the practical sustainable delivery of public health in Australia. However, the law can play a role in resolving this conflict through legislation, regulations, codes, administrative law and common law in an effort to ensure the quality and future sustainability of public health in Australia.     

Health and human rights: challenges of implementation and cultural change

The author identifies the evolution of discourse about human rights to health in medical law, health law and public health law, as well as in major international instruments. He emphasises the importance of General Comment No 14 on Art 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. He argues that its breadth but also its specificity in terms of accountable benchmarks and measures of health service provision are likely to frame discourse on "rights to health" in the succeeding years. He identifies the need for translation of the rhetoric in such instruments into meaningful and patient-informed data so that it becomes possible to compare and contrast advances (or otherwise) in rights to health within and among different countries.     

NGOs,international courts,and state backlash against human rights accountability: Evidence from NGO mobilization against Tanzania at the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights

When nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) encounter state resistance to human rights accountability, how do NGOs use international courts for their human rights advocacy strategies? Considering the overlapping phenomena of shrinking civic space within authoritarian, hybrid, and democratically backsliding regimes, and state backlash against international courts, NGOs navigate two potential levels of state backlash against human rights accountability. Building on the interdisciplinary scholarship on legal mobilization, we develop an integrated framework for explaining how states' two-level (domestic and international) backlash tactics can both promote and deter NGOs' strategic litigation at international human rights courts (IHRCs). States' backlash tactics can influence NGOs' opportunities, capacities, and goals for their human rights advocacy, and thus affect whether and how they pursue strategic litigation at IHRCs. We elucidate the value of this framework through case studies of NGOs' litigation against Tanzania at the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, an understudied IHRC. Drawing on an original data set, interviews, and documentation, we process-trace how Tanzania's various backlash tactics influenced whether and how NGOs litigated at the Court. Our framework and analysis show how state backlash against human rights accountability affects NGOs' mobilization at IHRCs and, relatedly, IHRCs' opportunities for influence.