Category: Pediatrics

SAINT LOUIS, MO. - August 2, 2021: A protestor holds a sign reading "Evictions Are Violence" at a protest held days after the federal eviction moratorium expired.

U.S. Eviction Policy is Harming Children: The Case for Sustainable Eviction Prevention to Promote Health Equity

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Emily A. Benfer

Without a nationwide commitment to sustainable eviction prevention, the United States will fail the rising number of renter households at risk of eviction. Worse still, the country will set millions of children on the path of long-term scarring and health inequity.

A staggering 14.8% of all children and 28.9% of children in families living below the poverty line experience an eviction by the time they are 15. For children, eviction functions as a major life event that has damaging effects long after they are forced to leave their home. It negatively affects emotional and physical well-being; increases the likelihood of emotional trauma, lead poisoning, and food insecurity; leads to academic decline and delays; and could increase all-cause mortality risk.

Read More

Vial and syringe.

Can Children Consent to the COVID Vaccine? The Case of Foster Care and Juvenile Justice

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Victoria Kalumbi

Despite pediatric COVID-19 vaccine availability, many youth remain unvaccinated, and are thus at higher risk of life-altering outcomes as a result of contracting COVID-19.[1]

Some children may be unvaccinated by no choice of their own, but instead because of decisions made by parents, guardians, or state or local government officials.

In this post, I argue that young people should have the opportunity to consent to vaccines. I focus on the specific case of children in foster care and the juvenile justice system, as they are particularly vulnerable amid the ongoing pandemic. However, the legal and political avenues explored in this piece to ensure that young people have a stake in their health and vaccine status are broadly generalizable to all children.

Read More

Serving trays with delicious food on table. Concept of school lunch.

New Data Reveal Sparse Protections for Students Who Cannot Pay for Meals at School

Temple University Center for Public Health Law Research Leave a comment

By Temple University Center for Public Health Law Research

As a federal program to serve meals to all U.S. public school students during the COVID-19 pandemic ends on June 30, the consequences of unpaid school meal debt will resurface for the millions of students nationwide facing food insecurity.

New data released on LawAtlas.org capture details of state unpaid school meal policies and reveals sparse and variable protections for students who cannot pay for meals at school.

Read More

Brooklyn, New York, United States - JUNE 13 2021: Protest in Brooklyn, NY for trans youth rights.

Misleading, Coercive Language in Bills Barring Trans Youth Access to Gender Affirming Care

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Arisa R. Marshall

On Friday, a federal judge temporarily enjoined part of a new Alabama law that would make it a felony for physicians to provide gender-affirming care to trans youth. The law had been in effect for less than a week.

This is only the most recent development relating to a raft of anti-trans legislation sweeping the country. More than twenty bills that would impose life-changing healthcare restrictions on transgender children have been introduced in statehouses nationwide over the past two years, threatening the wellbeing of transgender youth and communities. Most of these bills aim to entirely ban gender-affirming medical care for minors, including surgeries, prescription puberty blockers, and hormone replacement therapies.

These laws are detrimental to the mental, physical, and social health of children. They are dismissive of the experiences of transgender children and teenagers, misleading, and manipulative.

Read More

WASHINGTON, DC - OCT. 8, 2019: Rally for LGBTQ rights outside Supreme Court as Justices hear oral arguments in three cases dealing with discrimination in the workplace because of sexual orientation.

Affirming Nondiscrimination Rights: HHS Needs to Acknowledge a Private Right of Action for Section 1557 Violations

czhang Leave a comment

By Cathy Zhang

Last week, on the heels of attacks on trans youth and their families in Texas, the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued a notice and guidance expressing support for transgender and gender nonconforming youth and highlighting the civil rights and privacy laws surrounding gender affirming care.

OCR all but names the Texas attacks as unlawful under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, and disability by federally funded health programs or activities. It notes that for federally funded entities, restricting medically necessary care on the basis of gender — such as doctors reporting parents of patients to state authorities — “likely violates Section 1557.”

The guidance directs those who have been discriminated against on the basis of gender identity or disability in seeking access to gender-affirming health care to file a complaint through OCR. HHS can go further, however, by formally acknowledging that individuals have a legal right to enforce Section 1557 when they have experienced prohibited health care discrimination.

Read More

children wearing masks.

Reconsidering Mask Mandates

Carmel Shachar Leave a comment

By Carmel Shachar

The desire to get back to “normal” is an understandable one. And despite their prevalence for the last two years, masks don’t fit into most people’s concept of normal.

But removing mask requirements means rejecting yet another public health tool to control the pandemic and protect our health care system.

First, some context: most states haven’t had indoor mask mandates in place for many months. As of February 10th, only Washington, Oregon, California, New Mexico, Hawaii, Illinois, and Delaware had statewide indoor mask mandates. These remaining few states are now taking steps to end mask policies. Some states have narrower mask mandates that apply to schools, and are similarly moving to end such policies.

But the decision to end these mandates is not made in a vacuum. We should be thinking about what other public health initiatives and components should be in place before we lift these protections.

Read More

Child with bandaid on arm.

Reflections on Procedural Barriers to Pediatric COVID Vaccine Access

The Petrie-Flom Center Staff Leave a comment

By Fatima Khan

When news broke last week that Pfizer-BioNTech was submitting for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) a two-dose COVID vaccine regimen for children under 5 to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), many parents felt a glimmer of hope after a long time.

Up until a few days before, the public was expecting approval to possibly drag into summer. While the regimen would likely require a third dose, it became a possibility that children could start getting some level of protection as early as March. Finally children were acknowledged during a time when their needs have often been neglected or even ignored.

The shift in the FDA’s decision process is a critical moment to reflect on how we got here, and what we should strive for to ensure children aren’t repeatedly left behind amidst our new COVID reality.

Read More

College football on grass field in afternoon sunlight

There’s More Than Rules in Regulating Concussions

Jack Becker Leave a comment

By Jack Becker

The football world has used a variety of methods to make the sport safer: Compare modern football to football a century ago, when at least 18 people died playing the game in 1905 alone and Teddy Roosevelt had to intervene. In recent years, concussions and brain trauma have become football’s scarlet letter. While leagues have already made changes to prevent brain injuries, there’s more to be done.

This post considers the application of Lawrence Lessig’s New Chicago School approach to regulation to the prevention of concussions (and other types of brain damage generalized under the word “concussions” for simplicity) in football.

Read More

Baby held in someone's arms.

Remember the Babies: The Need for Off-Label Pediatric Use of COVID-19 Vaccines

Carmel Shachar Leave a comment

By Carmel Shachar

As trials stall and the omicron variant surges, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is failing parents by preventing off-label use of our existing COVID-19 vaccines in the under-five set.

The cries of frustration, anger, and fear from parents of small children have reached a new pitch amidst the ruckus of 2022. Parents of children under five years old need to navigate omicron-fueled rising pediatric hospitalization rates while their kids remain entirely unvaccinated. They must also juggle childcare and work responsibilities amid unpredictable, lengthy daycare and schooling closures. Give us the vaccine to help protect our kids, shorten quarantines, and keep children in care they all clamor.

But where are the vaccines for the pediatric set — the same vaccines that have been proven safe, both in adult populations and in older children? So far the story has focused on disappointing efficacy results and delays in studies from Pfizer and Moderna. But that is not the entire explanation for why parents of small children are blocked from vaccinating their offspring.

Read More

A half face dust mask and HEPA filter over white background.

Being an Adult in the Face of Omicron

Jennifer S. Bard Leave a comment

By Jennifer S. Bard

To those who believe that the federal government is a benign force doing the best they can to fight the COVID-19 pandemic and keep us all safe, I have two words of advice: Grow up.

Neither the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), or Dr. Fauci should be anthropomorphized into a benevolent but perhaps out-of-touch parental figure. They are not.

As a matter of law, the government, in contrast to your parents, or school, or perhaps even your employer, does not have a fiduciary duty to protect your (or any individual’s) health and safety. As the Supreme Court said in Deshaney v. Winnebago Country Dept of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1980) and again in Castlerock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), individuals do not have an enforceable right to government protection unless the state itself creates the danger. Their duty, if it exists, is to the public in general, which can encompass many factors beyond any one person’s health.

Just knowing that the government, duly elected or not, has no obligation to protect you or your family should be enough to look at its pandemic guidance as minimum, rather than maximum, standards. It should also encourage you to be proactive in taking precautions beyond those “recommended,” rather than seeing these minimal standards as unwarranted restrictions that can be negotiated down.

Read More