Medicare and Medicaid programs; advance directives--HCFA. Interim final rule with comment period

This interim final rule amends the Medicare and Medicaid regulations governing provider agreements and contracts to establish requirements for States, hospitals, nursing facilities, skilled nursing facilities, providers of home health care or personal care services, hospice programs and prepaid health plans concerning advance directives. An advance directive is a written instruction, such as a living will or durable power of attorney for health care, recognized under State law, relating to the provision of health care when an individual's condition makes him or her unable to express his or her wishes. The intent of these provisions is to enhance an individual's control over medical treatment decisions. This rule implements sections 4206 and 4751 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA '90), Public Law 101-508.     

Medicare and Medicaid programs; advance directives--HCFA. Final rule

This final rule responds to public comments on the March 6, 1992 interim final rule with comment period that amended the Medicare and Medicaid regulations governing provider agreements and contracts to establish requirements for States, hospitals, nursing facilities, skilled nursing facilities, providers of home health care or personal care services, hospice programs and managed care plans concerning advance directives. An advance directive is a written instruction, such as a living will or durable power of attorney for health care, recognized under State law, relating to the provision of health care when an individual's condition makes him or her unable to express his or her wishes. The intent of the advance directives provisions is to enhance an adult individual's control over medical treatment decisions. This rule confirms the interim final rule with several minor changes based on our review and consideration of public comments.     

Health care programs: fraud and abuse; amendments to OIG exclusion and CMP authorities resulting from Public Law 100-93--HHS. Final rule

This final rule implements the OIG sanction and civil money penalty provisions established through section 2 and other conforming amendments in the Medicare and Medicaid Patient and Program Protection Act of 1987, along with certain additional provisions contained in the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1987, the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988, OBRA of 1989, and OBRA of 1990. Specifically, these regulations are designed to protect program beneficiaries from unfit health care practitioners, and otherwise to improve the anti-fraud provisions of the Department's health care programs under titles V, XVIII, XIX and XX of the Social Security Act.     

The law and practice associated with advance directives in Canada and Australia: similarities, differences and debates

This article is a summary of research that investigated the Canadian and Australian legislative framework associated with advance directives in health care. The research focused on the context in which older people are encouraged to use advance directives. These are directions about refusal of medical treatment given in advance of incompetence. An advance directive may be given in a written document (living will) expressing one's wishes, by appointing another person (proxy) to make the decisions, or as a combination of the two. A lack of consistency and clarity about the terminology was found in both countries. This could be a barrier for older people to express their wishes in advance. Several confusing issues were also identified with the legislation related to advance directives. There appears to be a move towards appointing a substitute decision-maker, but with significant differences across the Australian States and in Canadian Provinces. The "conversation" about future decisions emerged as an important theme, together with an emphasis on the process of "advance care planning" replacing the focus on advance directive forms.     

美国成年病人放弃治疗机制对于中国的启示

美国倡导清醒有自决能力的成年人用预先指示的方式表明自己在丧失自决能力时的医疗选择。预先指示主要分为生前遗嘱和持续性医疗授权书两种形式。美国联邦和各州有相对完善的法律制度,规定预先指示的形式内容及预先指示不存在时能为病人作出决定的人群和权限。医院也会有程序指南为医务工作者提供指导原则。中国可借鉴美国经验在转变大众对于死亡的观念、尊重病人自主权、出台相应法律法规、行业指南、增强医务工作者的沟通技巧和人文关怀等方面作出积极改变,完善放弃治疗的程序,满足病人要求,解决医务工作者的两难困境。     

The legal role of medical professionals in decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment: part 2 (Queensland)

This is the second article in a series of three that examines the legal role of medical professionals in decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack capacity. This article considers the position in Queensland, including the parens patriae jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. A review of the law in this State reveals that medical professionals play significant legal roles in these decisions. However, the law is problematic in a number of respects and this is likely to impede medical professionals' legal knowledge in this area. The article examines the level of training medical professionals receive on issues such as advance health directives and substitute decision-making, and the available empirical evidence as to the state of medical professionals' knowledge of the law at the end of life. It concludes that there are gaps in legal knowledge and that law reform is needed in Queensland.     

Medicare program; self-implementing coverage and payments provisions: 1990 legislation--HCFA. Final rule with comment period

This rule updates Medicare regulations to add or conform them to certain self-implementing provisions on coverage of services and payment requirements under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA '90). OBRA '90 was enacted November 5, 1990 and the cited changes to the statute are already in effect. Certain related self-implementing provisions of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (OBRA '89), and the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act (MCCA) of 1988, are included as necessary for consistency and clarity of the OBRA '90 provisions.     

The disutility of advance directives: we know the problems, but are there solutions?

Advance directives (ADs) are recognized in some form by the laws of every state. Despite the availability of ADs for more than twenty years, few adults have completed any type of AD document. Even when ADs are validly executed, physicians routinelyfail to honor patients' wishes. The lack of communication between physicians and patients may be the primary reason why AD completion rates remain so low. The failure to honor an AD may stem from the physician's belief that to honor a directive would not be in the patient's best interest. The adoption and enforcement by all states of the Uniform Health-Care Decisions Act, recognition of a physician's ethical duty to assist patients in AD formulation, and routine third-party payor reimbursement to physicians for their role in patients' advance care planning will encourage and facilitate the completion and subsequent honoring of patients' directives.     

Medical research on patients with dementia--the role of advance directives in European legal instruments

Current international legal instruments recognise the use of advance directives to carry on the will of the dementing research participant beyond the boundaries of her present legal capacity. Advance directives are gaining greater recognition in patient care than in medical research, where their legal status is still somewhat unclear. In particular, the three major international documents on medical research - the Council of Europe Convention on Biomedicine and Human Rights (ETS 164), its Additional Protocol on Biomedical Research (ETS 195), and Directive 2001/20/EC on Clinical Trials on Medicinal Products--give conflicting messages on the legal status of advance directives in medical research. This article examines the provisions in these documents and their national applications in Finland and the United Kingdom.     

Dr. Jekyll's waiver of Mr. Hyde's right to refuse medical treatment: Washington's new law authorizing mental health care advance directives needs additional protection

Mental health care advance directives are gaining popularity nationwide. Following a growing trend, the Washington State Legislature has recently passed a law allowing patients to draft mental health care advance directives that could be irrevocable. Patients who sign an irrevocable directive essentially waive their fundamental right to refuse treatment in the future. The United States Supreme Court has held that waivers of fundamental rights must be made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. However, as passed, Washington's new law contains insufficient safeguards to guarantee such a waiver. This Comment proposes that the Washington State Legislature amend this law the require two additional protections: a "rights advocate" to explain the potential waiver of rights, and a written warning in the advance directive form. These safeguards will help ensure that patients make knowing and intelligent waivers of their fundamental right to refuse treatment.     

The legal role of medical professionals in decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment: part 1 (New South Wales)

This is the first article in a series of three that examines the legal role of medical professionals in decisions to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment from adults who lack capacity. This article considers the position in New South Wales. A review of the law in this State reveals that medical professionals play significant legal roles in these decisions. However, the law is problematic in a number of respects and this is likely to impede medical professionals' legal knowledge in this area. The article examines the level of training medical professionals receive on issues such as advance directives and substitute decision-making, and the available empirical evidence as to the state of medical professionals' knowledge of the law at the end of life. It concludes that there are gaps in legal knowledge and that law reform is needed in New South Wales.     

Video Advance Directives: A Turning Point for Advance Decision-Making? A Consideration of Their Roles and Implications for Law and Practice

Questions regarding making and implementing care preferences through advance directives have become increasingly significant as the greying population grows with rising numbers of people experiencing incapacity. Currently, there is no consensus in the format for making advance directives. Recent developments highlighted the use of recording technology as an option to counter the challenges of written forms. Services offering video and audio recording available for online and offline storage are emerging in the United States. These services presumably strengthen a person’s expression of care preferences for healthcare providers in making treatment decisions compared to written advance directives. This article examines the role video advance directives play in advance decision-making and their legal and practical implications to the existing framework. An appreciation of the legal challenges presented by this development facilitates an understanding of their use in contemporary advance directives and enables appropriate recommendations for implementing safeguards in their use.

     

Competition policy: consequences of restrictive trade practices and price-fixing provisions for medical practitioners in Australia and New Zealand

Competition laws have only applied to many participants in the health care industry in Australia and New Zealand since the mid 1990s. Since then, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has considered a number of applications by medical practitioner associations and private hospitals to authorise potentially anti-competitive conduct, while the New Zealand Commerce Commission has successfully prosecuted a group of ophthalmologists. Amongst medical practitioners, however, there is still confusion and misunderstanding concerning the type of conduct caught by the Australian Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the New Zealand Commerce Act 1986 (NZ). This is of serious concern given the substantial penalties associated with price-fixing and restrictive trade practices. This article examines the provisions of these Acts most relevant to medical practitioners as well as a number of determinations and judicial decisions. To provide practical assistance to medical practitioners, the key lessons are extracted.     

Crisis of conscience: reconciling religious health care providers' beliefs and patients' rights

In this note, Katherine A. White explores the conflict between religious health care providers who provide care in accordance with their religious beliefs and the patients who want access to medical care that these religious providers find objectionable. Specifically, she examines Roman Catholic health care institutions and HMOs that follow the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services and considers other religious providers with similar beliefs. In accordance with the Directives, these institutions maintain policies that restrict access to "sensitive" services like abortion, family planning, HIV counseling, infertility treatment, and termination of life-support. White explains how most state laws protecting providers' right to refuse treatments in conflict with religious principles do not cover this wide range of services. Furthermore, many state and federal laws and some court decisions guarantee patients the right to receive this care. The constitutional complication inherent in this provider-patient conflict emerges in White's analysis of the interaction of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment and patients' right to privacy. White concludes her note by exploring the success of both provider-initiated and legislatively mandated compromise strategies. She first describes the strategies adopted by four different religious HMOs which vary in how they increase or restrict access to sensitive services. She then turns her focus to state and federal "bypass" legislation, ultimately concluding that increased state supervision might help these laws become more viable solutions to provider-patient conflicts.     

Medicare program; self-implementing coverage and payment provisions: 1993 legislation--HCFA. Final rule with comment period

This rule updates Medicare regulations to conform them to certain self-implementing provisions on coverage of services and payment requirements under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA 93). OBRA 93 was enacted on August 10, 1993 and several of the cited changes to the statute are already in effect and the others will be shortly. We are also implementing a related provision of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA 90) as necessary for consistency and clarity of the OBRA 93 provisions.     

Medicare and Medicaid programs; preadmission screening and annual resident review--HCFA. Final rule with comment period

This rule sets forth State requirements for preadmission and annual review of individuals with mental illness or mental retardation who are applicants to or residents of nursing facilities that are certified for Medicaid. It also sets forth an appeals system for persons who may be transferred or discharged from facilities or who wish to dispute a determination made in the preadmission screening and annual review process. These provisions implement several provisions of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 (OBRA '87), Public Law 100-203 and the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA '90), Public Law 101-508.     

Medical: advance health care planning. Final rule

This document amends VA medical regulations to codify VA policy regarding advance health care planning. The final rule sets forth a mechanism for the use of written advance directives, i.e., a VA living will, a VA durable power of attorney for health care, and a State-authorized advance directive. The final rule also sets forth a mechanism for honoring verbal or non-verbal instructions from a patient when the patient is admitted to care when critically ill and loss of capacity may be imminent and the patient is not physically able to sign an advance directive form, or the appropriate form is not readily available. This is intended to help ensure that VA acts in compliance with patients' wishes concerning future health care.     

Policy deviations,uncertainty, and the European Court of Justice

The implementation of European Union directives into national law is at the discretion of member states. We analyze incentives for member states to deviate from these directives when the European Commission may sue a defecting member state and rulings at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) are uncertain. We find that higher uncertainty about the preferences of the ECJ increases policy deviation, irrespective of whether a case is taken to court or not. If decisions of member states to deviate are interdependent, the incidence of filed cases decreases while for those policies reaching the ECJ deviations increase.     

The impact of the adoption of gag laws on trust in the patient-physician relationship

Physician organizations, policy makers, and patient advocates have expressed concern that health plans have contractually limited the freedom of physicians to communicate with their patients. In response, many states have adopted gag laws that limit the ability of managed care contracts to restrict patient-physician communication. We examine the impact of these laws on patient trust in the physician. We analyzed patients' ratings of trust in their physicians in states before and after adoption of gag laws. Individuals in states that had such laws throughout the study period were used as the comparison group. The analysis is based on a nationally representative sample of adults obtained from the 1996-1997 and 1998-1999 Community Tracking Study Household Surveys. After adjustment for patient characteristics, it was estimated that the adoption of gag laws had no statistically significant impact on trust in the physician for the average patient. However, the adoption of gag laws is estimated to have increased trust in the physician by a modest amount (25 percent of a standard deviation) for health maintenance organization (HMO) enrollees who did not have a usual source of care. Gag laws may assure HMO enrollees without a usual source of care that their physicians are free to speak candidly about treatment options. This does not necessarily imply that physicians are prohibited from speaking freely in the absence of such laws, but gag laws indicate concerns (justified or not) that patients have about unrestricted communication with their health care providers.