Medical association calls for routine HIV testing of pregnant women

The Canadian Medical Association says that routine HIV testing of pregnant women is necessary because there are still babies being born with HIV infection. Critics respond that routine testing is the same as mandatory testing, that there is no reason to waive the requirement for informed consent accompanied by pre-test counselling, and that physicians need to do a better job of offering HIV testing to pregnant women.     

The new ASC safe harbor: the triumph of public policy over legal consistency

This Article traces the history of the OIG's use of safe harbors to allow certain activities that arguably violate a literal reading of the Anti-Kickback Statute. The author focuses particular attention upon the development of the ASC Safe Harbor from its genesis through its final issuance on November 19, 1999. The analysis finds legal inconsistency in the regulation in this area, which it attributes to the development of the ASC Safe Harbor being driven primarily by nonlegal, public policy concerns. The Article concludes by suggesting that OIG publicly embrace those policy goals and adopt broader investment-related safe harbors that focus on limiting returns to those attainable in a "fair market."     

Alberta: new bill will allow for mandatory HIV testing in emergency situations

A private member's bill is expected to be introduced in the spring 2004 session of the Alberta Legislative Assembly that will allow for forced testing of individuals for HIV, hepatitis, and other bloodborne diseases if their bodily fluids come into contact with emergency workers or Good Samaritans. The bill will likely have strong support from within the ranks of the governing Conservatives.     

Why public opinion changes: the implications for health and health policy

Research on stasis or change in public opinion toward health, health policy, and medical care tends to focus on short-term dynamics and to emphasize the impact of discrete messages communicated by individual speakers in particular situations. This focus on what we term "situational framing," though valuable in some respects, is poorly equipped to assess changes that may occur over the longer term. We focus, instead, on "structural framing" to understand how institutionalized public health and health care policies impact public opinion and behavior over time. Understanding the dynamics of public opinion over time is especially helpful in tracking the political effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 as it moves from the debate over its passage to its implementation and operation.