Blue stethoscope with gavel on white background

Two Conceptions of the Right to Health Care: Video with Gabriel Scheffler

The Health Law Policy, Bioethics, and Biotechnology Workshop provides a forum for discussion of new scholarship in these fields from the world’s leading experts.

The workshop is led by Professor I. Glenn Cohen, and presenters come from a wide range of disciplines and departments.

In this video, Gabriel Scheffler gives a preview of his paper, “Health Care Reform and Two Conceptions of the Right to Health Care,” which he will present at the Health Law Policy workshop on November 30, 2020. Watch the full video below:

image of the US Supreme Court

What the Supreme Court’s ACA Ruling Might Mean for Nonprofit Hospitals

By Jacob Madden

California v. Texas, a pending Supreme Court case that concerns the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA)’s individual mandate, could have profound implications for the standards to which nonprofit hospitals are held.

The ACA’s individual mandate requires people to have health insurance or otherwise pay a penalty. While the Court previously upheld the individual mandate as being constitutional under Congress’ taxation power in the 2012 case National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, it may not do so again. For one, the 2017 Trump tax cuts effectively eliminated the individual mandate’s penalty, raising the question of whether the individual mandate is still a valid exercise of Congress’ taxation power. And conservative Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation, filling the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat, has significantly changed the composition of the court.

If the Court strikes down the individual mandate, the rest of the ACA could be in jeopardy, depending on the specifics of the ruling. The Court has several options: sever the individual mandate from the ACA and keep the ACA alive, strike down the ACA in part, or strike down the ACA entirely.

The immediate concern, should the Court strike down the ACA entirely, is that tens of millions of Americans likely would lose their health insurance and other protections afforded by the law. Another, albeit lesser known concern, is that we would lose § 501(r).

Read More

Woman holding sign that reads "I can't breathe."

Anti-Bias Training is Needed to Counter the Public Health Threat of Systemic Racism

By Megan J. Shen

With the recent confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, many public health issues are seemingly on the line, including the Affordable Care Act, women’s reproductive rights, and access to in vitro fertilization. But Coney Barrett’s lack of awareness of the rampant, systemic racism in the U.S. – an oversight that generally was left out of the flurry of media coverage around her confirmation – is symptomatic of an even more pervasive and dangerous public health threat.

Senator Cory Booker’s questioning of Judge Amy Coney Barrett during her Supreme Court Confirmation hearings revealed her apparent lack of awareness of systemic racism. Booker brought up Coney Barrett’s ruling on a workplace discrimination case.

“This employee claimed that he had been subjected to hostile work environment, and that the supervisor called him the N-word,” Booker said, “But you ruled that the employee had failed to make the case that he had been fired in retaliation for his complaints about race discrimination.”

This instance is one of the clearest demonstrations of the systemic racism prevalent in the U.S. due, in large part, to a lack of anti-racist training and education.

Read More

Close-up Of Stethoscope On Us Currency And American Flag.

Short-Term, Limited-Duration Insurance May Be Here to Stay

By Abe Sutton

Short-term, limited-duration insurance (STLDI) may be here to stay despite legal attacks, poor branding, and a potential Democratic victory in the upcoming Presidential election.

Though the Obama administration curtailed STLDI, it is now likely to endure due to black letter administrative law and changes in circumstance since 2016.

In light of this, a potential Biden administration should package legislation codifying the current regulations with legislation increasing individual market subsidies. A package along these lines could appeal to both sides of the aisle.

In this post, I provide an overview of what STLDI is, explain why administrative law precedents complicate the reversal of current regulations, and propose a path forward for a potential Biden administration. Read More

Close-up of a stethoscope on an American flag

Why Justice is Good for America’s Health

By Dayna Bowen Matthew

Justice is good for health [and] . . . health is the byproduct of justice.

— Norman Daniels, Bruce Kennedy & Ichiro Kawachi (Boston Review, 2000)

Among the most salient lessons to be learned from the coronavirus pandemic are that unjust laws produce unjust health outcomes, and that justice is just plain good for America’s health.

Health justice is the moral mandate to protect and advance an equal opportunity for all to enjoy greatest health and well-being possible. Health justice means that no one person or group of people are granted or excluded from the means of pursuing health on an inequitable basis. To achieve health justice, societal institutions such as governments and health care providers must act to advance equality, by increasing fairness and decreasing unfairness of their current and historic impacts on populations.

Read More

doctor holding clipboard.

A Critical Race Perspective on Social Risk Targeting in the Health Care Sector

By Brietta R. Clark

Health care programs, such as Medicaid, are increasingly using social risk assessments to target certain patients or communities for interventions intended to promote health. This includes partnering with other service sectors to provide nutrition, housing or employment assistance, transportation, parenting education, care coordination, and other behavioral supports.

These social interventions are touted as a way to improve health equity, yet they do not address structural racism, a powerful determinant of health. These interventions tend not to measure racial impact, or account for how racial inequity shapes the very structures and systems upon which social interventions depend. Indeed, this inattention means that such well-meaning interventions may inadvertently reinforce racial inequity, subordination, and stigma in marginalized communities.

Read More

Protestor holding sign that reads: "we need reform now."

Using Anti-Racist Policy to Promote the Good Governance of Necessities

By Aysha Pamukcu and Angela P. Harris

Multiple crises creating a “wet cement” moment

In the U.S., racism has repeatedly stymied progress toward the good governance of necessities. Anti-racism, therefore, must be at the core of solutions to our present crises.

One of the most powerful applications of anti-racism is through policy. By enacting and enforcing anti-racist policy, we can govern more of life’s necessities as public goods.

Achieving this requires a robust coalition of advocates who are organized, interdisciplinary, and prepared to promote the equitable governance of vital goods. The “civil rights of health” — a partnership of civil rights, public health, and social justice advocates — can help provide the change infrastructure needed for this paradigm shift.

Read More

NHS building

Update on Developing a Culture of Patient Safety in the NHS

By John Tingle

There are no quick fixes to developing an ingrained patient safety culture in health systems — change will not happen overnight. Nevertheless, the National Health Service (NHS) and the government in the U.K. are committed to continuing to improve patient safety.

In 2019, NHS England and NHS Improvement laid down an NHS Patient Safety Strategy roadmap, which continues to hold potential one year later.

Read More

Empty hospital bed.

Addressing Health Inequities in End-of-Life Care in the Era of COVID-19

By Megan J. Shen

Inequities in end-of-life care have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, but have yet to receive the same level of attention as some other health disparities brought to the fore recently.

Quality end-of-life care is focused on reducing human suffering and aiding patients in receiving support during the dying process.

Traditionally, poor quality end-of-life care involves the overtreatment of patients, as in the case of continuing to treat incurable cancer aggressively. However, COVID-19 has introduced new challenges in achieving quality care at the end of life. Specifically, it is now more challenging to reduce human suffering at the end of life because of limitations in providing access to two critical resources: (1) medical care that can relieve physical suffering in the dying process and (2) support, such as loved ones, as well as needed psychological, spiritual, and physical support to cope with the existential threat of dying. COVID-19 has made access to both of these a greater challenge for underrepresented minorities.

Read More

Busy Nurse's Station In Modern Hospital

Violence Against Health Care Workers: Legislative Responses

By Stephen Wood

COVID-19 and other diseases aren’t the only threat to health care workers. Violence in the workplace is a common occurrence and on the rise.

Despite these troubling trends, the policy response at both federal and state levels has, so far, been lacking.

In a recent survey of nurses, 59% reported that they had been the victims of workplace violence. More than half of those respondents went on to report that they were not satisfied with how the incidents were handled.

Read More