PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES AND THEIR SEXUAL,REPRODUCTIVE, AND PARENTING RIGHTS: AN INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Despite important gains in human rights, persons with disabilities — and in particular women and girls with disabilities — continue to experience significant inequalities in the areas of sexual, reproductive, and parenting rights. Persons with disabilities are sterilized at alarming rates; have decreased access to reproductive health care services and information; and experience denial of parenthood. Precipitating these inequities are substantial and instantiated stereotypes of persons with disabilities as either asexual or unable to engage in sexual or reproductive activities, and as incapable of performing parental duties. The article begins with an overview of sexual, reproductive, and parenting rights regarding persons with disabilities. Because most formal adjudications of these related rights have centered on the issue of sterilization, the article analyzes commonly presented rationales used to justify these procedures over time and across jurisdictions. Next, the article examines the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the attendant obligations of States Parties regarding rights to personal integrity, access to reproductive health care services and information, parenting, and the exercise of legal capacity. Finally, the article highlights fundamental and complex issues requiring future research and consideration.     

Two faces of patient safety and care quality: a Franco-American comparison

Patient safety, and more broadly the quality of care, is typically discussed with reference to the reduction of preventable adverse events within hospitals and adherence to practice guidelines on care processes. We call it the 'care-centered approach' and recognize that the United States is a leader in the field. Another face of patient safety and care quality may be defined as the 'system-centered approach'. It focuses on access to a timely and effective continuum of health-care services--clinical prevention, primary care and appropriate referral to and receipt of specialty care. Although France's efforts to pursue a care-centered approach to patient safety are limited, its system-centered approach yields some benefits. Based on the evidence we have reviewed for access to primary care (hospital discharges for avoidable hospital conditions), mortality amenable to medical intervention and consumer satisfaction, in the United States and France, there appear to be good grounds for bolstering the system-centered approach in the United States.     

Public capabilities and health care effectiveness: implications from a comparative perspective

This article examines inter-relationship between "centers" and "peripheries" within political, professional and health care systems. It seeks to determine which conditions tend to improve the capacity of public authorities to further such measures of effectiveness as access to, quality of, and complementarity of health care delivery. Examples are selected from the experience of the United States and West European countries.     

A consideration of user financial incentives to address health inequalities

Health inequalities and user financial incentives to encourage health-related behavior change are two topical issues in the health policy discourse, and this article attempts to combine the two; namely, we try to address whether the latter can be used to reduce the former in the contexts of the United Kingdom and the United States. Payments for some aspects of medical adherence may offer a promising way to address, to some extent, inequalities in health and health care in both countries. However, payments for more sustained behavior change, such as that associated with smoking cessation and weight loss, have thus far shown little long-term effect, although more research that tests the effectiveness of different incentive mechanism designs, informed by the findings of behavioral economics, ought to be undertaken. Many practical, political, ethical, and ideological objections can be waged against user financial incentives in health, and this article reviews a number of them, but the justifiability of and limits to these incentives require more academic and public discourse so as to gain a better understanding of the circumstances in which they can legitimately be used.     

Why hasn't integrated health care developed widely in the United States and not at all in England?

There have been influential advocates for financing and organizing health care in the United States and England based on the model of integrated health care delivery systems (IHCDSs). Despite good evidence that a few IHCDSs provide high-quality health care economically, such organizations are rare and localized in a few market areas in the United States and are absent in the English National Health Service (NHS). The explanation of why this is so includes various contributory factors: the way the development of the medical profession in each country pursued specialization; the division in British medicine between general practitioners and specialists; and the characteristics that we identify of established successful IHCDSs, which created formidable barriers to entry for a new IHCDS. This explains why currently the most promising organizational developments in U.S. health care are hybrids resulting from vertical integration. In England government policies of an "internal market," as adopted in the 1990s and currently, were and are based on a purchaser-provider split with the objectives that providers would compete and be funded by a system in which "money follows the patient." These policies recognize the division in British medicine, which also means that it is difficult to implement a reorganized English NHS based on high-performing IHCDSs.     

Hidden convergence: toward a historical comparison of U.S. and U.K. health policy

The social science literature on the comparative history of the welfare state offers conflicting accounts of the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. At first blush, the comparative history of health care policy in the United States and the United Kingdom seems to affirm the dominant view that the U.S. and U.K. welfare states have diverged substantially during the twentieth century. A comparison of U.S. and U.K. health policy, however, suggests that there are more parallels and points of tangency between the two systems than are readily apparent. The comparative history of health policy over the past century reveals common political and policy challenges and frequent interchanges of policy ideas, and helps uncover the political dynamics behind the development of health policy in the two countries, which can, in turn, help illuminate the contemporary politics of reform in both countries.     

Access to health care for undocumented migrants: a comparative policy analysis of England and the Netherlands

The presence of undocumented migrants is increasing in many Western countries despite wide-ranging attempts by governments to increase border security. Measures taken to control the influx of immigrants include policies that restrict access to publicly funded health care for undocumented migrants. These restrictions to health care access are controversial, and evidence suggests they do not always have the intended effect. This study provides a comparative analysis of institutional, actor-related, and contextual factors that have influenced health care policy development on undocumented migrants in England and the Netherlands. For undocumented migrants, England restricts its access to care at the point of service, while the Netherlands restricts through the payment system for services. The study includes an analysis of policy papers and semistructured, in-depth interviews with various actors in both countries. Findings confirm the influence of such contextual factors as immigration considerations and cost concerns on health care policy making in this area. However, these factors cannot explain the differences between the two countries. Previously enacted policies, especially the organization of the health care system, affected the kind of restrictions for undocumented migrants. Concerns about the side effects of generous treatment of undocumented migrants on other groups played a substantial role in formulating restrictive policies in both countries. Evidently, policy development and implementation is critically affected by institutional rules, which govern the degree of influence that doctors and professional medical associations have on the policy process.     

Nurse practitioner challenges to the orthodox structure of health care delivery: regulation and restraints on trade

Until recently, physicians have been the primary health care providers in the United States. In response to the rising health care costs and public demand of the past decade, allied health care providers have challenged this orthodox structure of health care delivery. Among these allied health care providers are nurse practitioners, who have attempted to expand traditional roles of the registered nurse. This article focuses on the legal issues raised by several major obstacles to the expansion of nurse practitioner services: licensing restrictions, third party reimbursement policies, and denial of access to medical facilities and physician back-up services. The successful judicial challenges to discriminatory practices against other allied health care providers will be explored as a solution to the nurse practitioners' dilemma.     

U.S. policy on health inequities: the interplay of politics and research

What is the relationship between scientific research and government action in addressing health inequalities in the United States? What factors increase the impact of scientific research on public policy? To answer these questions, we focus on racial and ethnic disparities in health status and health care in the United States. We first review the history of the disparities issue to elucidate how the continual and persistent interplay between political action and scientific research drives government policy. We then analyze two recent government-sponsored reports about racial and ethnic disparities to understand the strategic consequences of issue framing. We draw lessons about how disparities research can have a greater impact on public policy.     

Playing fair: fairness beliefs and health policy preferences in the United States

Conventional wisdom suggests that the best way to persuade Americans to support changes in health care policy is to appeal to their self-interest - particularly to concerns about their economic and health security. An alternative strategy, framing problems in the health care system to emphasize inequalities, could also, however, mobilize public support for policy change by activating underlying attitudes about the unfairness or injustice of these inequalities. In this article, we draw on original data from a nationally representative survey to describe Americans' beliefs about fairness in the health domain, including their perceptions of the fairness of particular inequalities in health and health care. We then assess the influence of these fairness considerations on opinions about the appropriate role of private actors versus government in providing health insurance. Respondents believe inequalities in access to and quality of health care are more unfair than unequal health outcomes. Even after taking into account self-interest considerations and the other usual suspects driving policy opinions, perceptions of the unfairness of inequalities in health care strongly influence respondents' preferences for government provision of health insurance.     

Working to Death: The Regulation of Working Hours in Health Care

Recent research highlights significant risks associated with health professionals working long hours—risks to their health and safety, to the safety and quality of care provided to patients, and to public safety. This article undertakes a review of the various instruments used to regulate working hours in health systems, using six countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and the European Union as primary comparators. The review demonstrates differences in the instruments used to regulate the issue in these countries and in the economic, social, and cultural factors that limit instrument choice and moderate instrument effectiveness.     

Eligibility for health care benefits for certain Filipino veterans in the United States. Final rule

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical regulations describe veterans who are eligible to receive health care from VA in the United States. This document amends VA medical regulations to provide eligibility for VA hospital care, nursing home care, and outpatient services for any Filipino Commonwealth Army veteran, including those recognized by authority of the U.S. Army as belonging to organized Filipino guerilla forces, and for any veteran of the new Philippine Scouts, provided that any such veteran resides in the U.S. and is either a citizen of the U.S. or is lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence. Under this regulatory provision, these certain veterans are eligible for VA hospital care, nursing home care, and outpatient medical services in the United States in the same manner and subject to the same terms and conditions as apply to U.S. veterans.     

The national residency exchange: a proposal to restore primary care in an age of microspecialization

Healthcare deficiencies in the United States have long been perpetuated by a shortage of primary care providers. A core purpose of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is to provide health insurance for America's approximately fifty million uninsured. Implementation of universal health insurance, however, does not mean sufficient healthcare access for all, since the supply of physicians does not and will not meet demand. For reasons reviewed in this Article, the current physician shortage mainly impacts primary care providers. This shortage is particularly troubling because increased provision of primary care relative to specialty care has been associated with improvement in health outcomes, disease prevention, cost effectiveness, and coordination of care. This Article highlights provisions in the PPACA that impact primary care physicians. Finally, this Article proposes the creation of a universal primary care loan repayment program and a national residency exchange designed to alleviate the U.S. primary care crisis by facilitating optimal distribution of resident physicians in each medical specialty based on community need.     

Inching toward incrementalism: federalism, devolution, and health policy in the United States and the United Kingdom

In the United States, the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 envisions a significant increase in federal oversight over the nation's health care system. At the same time, however, the legislation requires the states to play key roles in every aspect of the reform agenda (such as expanding Medicaid programs, creating insurance exchanges, and working with providers on delivery system reforms). The complicated intergovernmental partnerships that govern the nation's fragmented and decentralized system are likely to continue, albeit with greater federal oversight and control. But what about intergovernmental relations in the United Kingdom? What impact did the formal devolution of power in 1999 to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have on health policy in those nations, and in the United Kingdom more generally? Has devolution begun a political process in which health policy in the United Kingdom will, over time, become increasingly decentralized and fragmented, or will this "state of unions" retain its long-standing reputation as perhaps the most centralized of the European nations? In this article, we explore the federalist and intergovernmental implications of recent reforms in the United States and the United Kingdom, and we put forward the argument that political fragmentation (long-standing in the United States and just emerging in the United Kingdom) produces new intergovernmental partnerships that, in turn, produce incremental growth in overall government involvement in the health care arena. This is the impact of what can be called catalytic federalism.     

Hospitals, finance, and health system reform in Britain and the United States, c. 1910-1950: historical revisionism and cross-national comparison

Comparative histories of health system development have been variously influenced by the theoretical approaches of historical institutionalism, political pluralism, and labor mobilization. Britain and the United States have figured significantly in this literature because of their very different trajectories. This article explores the implications of recent research on hospital history in the two countries for existing historiographies, particularly the coming of the National Health Service in Britain. It argues that the two hospital systems initially developed in broadly similar ways, despite the very different outcomes in the 1940s. Thus, applying the conceptual tools used to explain the U.S. trajectory can deepen appreciation of events in Britain. Attention focuses particularly on working-class hospital contributory schemes and their implications for finance, governance, and participation; these are then compared with Blue Cross and U.S. hospital prepayment. While acknowledging the importance of path dependence in shaping attitudes of British bureaucrats toward these schemes, analysis emphasizes their failure in pressure group politics, in contrast to the United States. In both countries labor was also crucial, in the United States sustaining employment-based prepayment and in Britain broadly supporting system reform.     

Labour law after neoliberalism?

Over the course of the past 40 years, neoliberalism has all but destroyed the institutions that once civilized labour markets. In the wake of that destruction, labour law reform is being driven in some jurisdictions by a new kind of right-wing populist politics. What does this hold in store for work relations? Our investigation of contemporary labour law begins with a brief look backwards to the pre- and post-war decades and to the ostensible depoliticization of the law under neoliberalism. We then consider the possible emergence of a distinctly right-wing populist approach to labour law in countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Poland, drawing comparisons with the German experience after neocorporatism. Finally, we take a normative turn and consider what steps ought to be taken by a government intent on addressing class inequalities and restoring the kind of rights that post-war democracies once conferred on workers understood to be industrial citizens.     

Public health and human rights: questions from an epidemic in Prato

This article uses Carlo Cipolla's account of the plague epidemic in Prato in 1630-1631 to identify several key questions in public health. The article goes on to observe that the underlying problems posed for public health by the plague epidemic in Prato are similar, in important respects, to those encountered in addressing contemporary public health concerns. Questions of inequalities in health and socio-economic differentials in mortality; the relationship between economic wellbeing and health; the relevance of access to effective interventions; the significance of knowledge concerning disease aetiology or uncertainty in devising and implementing appropriate interventions; and the role of regulation in controlling public health hazards are as relevant today as in the Renaissance. However, contemporary recognition of the right to the highest attainable standard of health has altered the nature of public health responses. Concern for individuals' and populations' rights to health can be seen to have the potential to inform policies for inequalities in health, for economic development in middle- and low-income countries, for access to health care and essential medicines, and for strategies to regulate and control emerging risks to health.     

Health care financing among the elderly: who really pays the bills?

This paper investigates the issue of who pays the health care bills of the elderly by considering the types of subsidized health insurance protection enjoyed by the noninstitutionalized elderly and the way that increased Medicare cost-sharing efforts in the 1980s are affecting those without additional health insurance subsidies. In making this examination we estimate the out-of-pocket health care expenditures of the elderly either directly or as nonsubsidized medigap premiums by income level, taking into account four types of health insurance subsidies received by elderly persons: Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Administration health care, and subsidized health insurance from either current or former employers. We find that increased cost sharing is likely to fall most heavily on those elderly least likely to afford it: the poor and near-poor elderly who have only Medicare as a health insurance subsidy, particularly those who are older and sicker and who use Medicare services more heavily. These persons are caught between well-intentioned federal cost-cutting efforts and the often confusing panoply of health insurance programs for the aged, and they will bear an inequitably large portion of any future Medicare cost-sharing initiatives.