US: health department liable for incorrectly telling man he had HIV

In January 2002, a jury in Oklahoma City awarded US$1.4 million in damages to a man who was incorrectly told in October 1993 by the county health department that he was HIV-positive.     

The federal government and academic texts as barriers to informed consent

Informed patient consent for medical treatment is required by both law and medical ethics. Yet, both federal agencies and academicians are participating in the suppression of information about the heightened risk of breast cancer posed by oral contraceptives and induced abortion. There is historical precedent in the long-delayed acknowledgement of the smoking/lung cancer link. By law, a patient has the right to be fully informed of the nature of her medical condition and any proposed course of therapy. It is assumed that a patient will be given the complete and true scientific basis of her diagnosis and treatment, to ensure that her well-being and her autonomy in decision-making are protected. Informed consent is the process by which a patient can participate in choices about medical treatment. It originates from the legal and ethical right of the patient to direct what is done to her body, and from the ethical duty of the physician to involve the patient in her medical care. Our federal government has become a barrier to informed consent concerning oral contraceptive drugs and induced abortion.     

The states "race" with the federal government for stem cell research

This article presents an innovative study of the effect of individual states and private institutes in pushing forward stem cell research despite a federal ban on creating new stem cell lines. The author analyzes the impact of state legislation, proposing that states are reacting to federal policy by serving as laboratories for what is traditionally federally funded biomedical research.     

Red tape and technology transfer in US government laboratories

The purpose of this paper is to gauge the effects of red tape and bureaucratization on the technology-transfer activities and effectiveness of government laboratories in the United States. Two central questions are addressed: Do laboratories involved significantly in technology transfer have more red tape than others? and Does the level of red tape have an effect on technology-transfer success? Objective and perceptual measures of red tape are used. Technologytransfer effectiveness is measured in terms of getting other organizations to adopt technology developed in the laboratory (“out the door” success) and of the commercial impact of transfers. Data are derived from questionnaire responses provided by directors of 276 federal- and state-government laboratories. Results indicate that laboratories involved in technology transfer do not have higher levels of red tape. Out-the-door technology-transfer success relates strongly to low degrees of perceived red tape, whereas high ratings for commercial impact are associated with actual low levels of red tape in acquiring project funding and lowcost equipment.     

The federal government and technology transfer implementing the 1986 act: Signs of progress

The Technology Transfer Act of 1986 clearly brought into focus the importance of technology-transfer activities in the federal government. Recognition of the potential benefit to be realized by access to results of federally sponsored research was acknowledged at the highest levels of government. While many departments and agencies had been transferring technology within the limits of existing authority and budgets, the act stimulated them as well as less-aggressive agencies to further strengthen their transfer operations. This paper reviews the status of selected agency technology transfer in 1985, describes important progress since passage of the act in 1986, and notes issues that remain to be resolved.     

Amendment of the fee exemption for federal, state and local government employees--DEA, Justice. Final rule

This final rule limits the exemption from payment of application fees for registration or reregistration to Federal, state, or local government operated hospitals or institutions. This will eliminate the need for DEA to dedicate manpower or other resources to controlling abuse of the fee exempt status.     

The International Committee of the Red Cross and International Human Rights Law

Throughout a considerable part of its history, the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has customarily refrainedfrom invoking international human rights law, for reason ofthis law's alleged politicisation. However, the changing characterof armed conflicts and other situations of violence where theICRC is currently operating have prompted it to set a frameworkfor making some limited use of selected and applicable humanrights, for the purpose of reinforcing the protection and assistanceit provides. This article examines how the ICRC may use humanrights in this way during armed conflicts, through the prismof international humanitarian law, as well as the conditionsfor their invocation in accordance with relevant ICRC doctrines.     

Beyond "safe and effective": the role of the federal government in supporting and disseminating comparative-effectiveness research

Over the past century, medical advancements have resulted in tremendous health gains for Americans. Although the federal government has played a prominent role in ensuring that new treatments are safe and effective, questions about which medical treatments work best under which circumstances have largely remained unanswered. Thus, the federal government's recent major investments in comparative-effectiveness research have potential to play a significant role in helping both patients and health care providers navigate the vast array of available treatment options, as well as in improving the quality, efficiency, and delivery of health care system-wide. Yet, the controversial nature of the government's foray into comparative-effectiveness research also suggests that the path toward realizing these goals may be treacherous. This Article describes the rationales for federal support of comparative-effectiveness research and potential models for that involvement, analyzes the federal government's recent investments in the research, and concludes with predictions about the probable outcomes of these investments. While increased federal support for comparative-effectiveness research is unlikely to achieve all of the benefits anticipated by its supporters, it is a crucial step toward ensuring that Americans are able to take full advantage of the benefits of medical innovation     

Africa: regional workshop held on HIV/AIDS and the right to health

In October 2003, the AIDS and Rights Alliance of Southern African (ARASA) and the Zambia AIDS Law Research and Advocacy Network (ZARAN) held a regional workshop on HIV/AIDS and the Right to Health: Challenges and Opportunities, at Kafue Gorge, Zambia.     

红十字救护法律责任的豁免与限制——基于好萨玛利亚人法的分析

红十字救护在应对重大自然灾害、突发公共事件的过程中一直发挥着积极、重要的作用.中国红十字会每年耗费巨大的人力、物力、财力进行救护员培训.但在实践中,由于我国现行相关法律法规的缺失,诸多救护员担心即便是正当救护也可能面临承担法律责任的风险,因此在遇到伤者需要救助的情形时也慎于出手,无法更好地发挥群众生命健康守护员的作用.借鉴西方国家好萨玛利亚人法的有关规定,我国也应当设置相关法律法规对红十字救护的法律责任实行有条件地豁免,即便救护员应该承担一定的赔偿责任,也应对其责任进行适当限制.     

Genocide, Justice and the Forensic Sensibilities of the International Committee of the Red Cross

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a privateorganization formed, in 1865, under the laws of Switzerland,with the aim of making wars more humane. In order to achievethis aim, the ICRC dedicated itself to the mission of givingsuccour to the victims of war, and of initiating the adoptionof humanitarian rules of conduct of armed conflicts. In theensuing years, the international community endorsed the workof the ICRC and recognized its roles accordingly. In the meantime,there was no international criminal justice system in placeto punish those who violated the international law of war. Morethan a century and a quarter after the birth of the ICRC, theUnited Nations initiated the creation of an international criminaljustice system, with the establishment of the InternationalCriminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda,under the powers of the Security Council to maintain internationalpeace and security. The objective was to end impunity for thosewho would violate international law by committing genocide,crimes against humanity and war crimes. In a quite notable development,the ICRC registered in absolute terms its position to the effectthat neither it nor those who worked under its auspices maybe subjected to testimony before these International Tribunals.The bases offered for this assertion of absolute testimonialimmunity are the practical requirements of the work of the ICRC,as well as customary international law which is said to haverecognized such a rule. This paper disputes the ICRC's assertionof absolute testimonial immunity as correctly founded in lawor principle, although recognizing that the important work ofthe ICRC does fairly warrant a judicial reluctance to summonICRC into the witness box. Nevertheless, such reluctance mustbe invoked on a case-by-case basis, and is not a matter of substantiverule of law.