Tort reform proposals: a toolbox for change

Tort reform is controversial because of the need to balance cost considerations with the legitimate needs of plaintiffs who have suffered malpractice injury. In addition, proponents and opponents of the different proposals often formulate their positions based largely on anecdotal evidence and concerns of special interest groups rather than careful studies. As a result, it may be some time before malpractice reform is addressed comprehensively at the federal level, leaving the states to their own reform devices.     

Approaches to low-income groups' sexuality: a comparative study of women in three low-income contexts in Peru

"This work...examines the cultural dimension of sexuality and fertility of women from [low-income] sectors in Peru. It intends to explain the cultural processes that fall into the intermediate variables of fertility, such as marriage rate, contraception, breastfeeding and...abortion. These dimensions of sexual and reproductive life are analyzed according to two explanatory dimensions: generation and cultural context of socialization. The general hypothesis is that a cultural process of homogenization of the values and behaviors has been taking place over sexuality, in such a way that the younger generations will show similar standard behaviors and values no matter their context of socialization; in the meantime, in the older groups there will exist contextual differences in these dimensions." (SUMMARY IN ENG)     

Are there environmental factors influencing the choice of death by drowning as a means of suicide in the Geneva canton?

123 out of 850 suicides that occurred in the Canton of Geneva between 1980 and 1989 were suicides by submersion. 75 women and 48 men committed this kind of suicide. 89 victims (57 women and 32 men) were older than 40 years. In all cases the spatial distance between the residence of the suicides and the nearest river or lake was determined; a correlation with the tendency to commit suicide by drowning was not evident. More than geographical factors, the psychological influences have to be considered.     

The FDA may not regulate tobacco products as "drugs" or as "medical devices"

Professor Richard Merrill contends that the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act does not grant the FDA regulatory authority over cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products. The fact that Congress did not expressly deny the FDA regulatory authority over tobacco cannot, Professor Merrill argues, be used to infer such authority. This inference is particularly inappropriate in the case of tobacco regulation, he maintains, because there is compelling evidence that Congress had no intention of delegating this authority to the FDA. He is unpersuaded that presidential approval legally sanctions the FDA's claim of authority by granting it a superficial political legitimacy. Finally, he reminds us of the FDA's own repeated denials of jurisdiction over tobacco products, and he recalls the numerous times that Congress passed legislation directed at tobacco without granting the FDA any role in its regulation. Professor Merrill's Essay, like the other pieces in this volume, was written after the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina decided Coyne Beahm v. FDA, but before a three judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed that decision in Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. FDA. In Coyne Beahm, the District Court held that the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act authorized the FDA to regulate tobacco products, but not tobacco advertising. The Fourth Circuit rejected the District Court's jurisdictional ruling and invalidated the FDA's regulations in their entirety. The Clinton Administration has since requested an en banc rehearing before the Fourth Circuit.