covid-19 virus.

Health Justice Strategies to Combat the Pandemic: Video Preview with Ruqaiijah Yearby

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, Ruqaiijah Yearby, Seema Mohapatra, Lindsay Wiley, and Emily Benfer give a preview of their paper, “Health Justice Strategies to Combat the Pandemic: Eliminating Discrimination, Poverty, and Health Disparities During and After COVID-19,” which Yearby will present at the Health Law Policy workshop on October 13, 2020. Watch the full video below:

computer and stethoscope

How Telehealth Could Improve — or Worsen — Racial Disparities

By Craig Konnoth, JD, M.Phil., Wendy Netter Epstein, JD, and Max Helveston, JD

Despite upping the stakes of America’s partisan divide, the pandemic has prompted bipartisan support for at least one cause — the rapid rollout of telehealth, which allows people to see their doctors by videoconference or telephone.

In last week’s executive order, the Trump Administration reaffirmed its commitment to the use of telehealth. While telehealth may be, in many ways, a panacea for access to healthcare, particularly in COVID times, we should be concerned that patients of color may be left behind.

Read More

Minneapolis, MN / USA - May 26 2020: Black Lives Matter, "I Can't Breathe" Protest for George Floyd.

Expendable Lives and COVID-19

By Matiangai Sirleaf

Two French doctors recently appeared on television and discussed using African subjects in experimental trials for an antidote to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19).

“Shouldn’t we do this study in Africa, where there are no masks, no treatment, no resuscitation, a bit like some studies on AIDS, where among prostitutes, we try things, because they are exposed, and they don’t protect themselves. What do you think?” asked Jean-Paul Mira, head of the intensive care unit at the Cochin Hospital in Paris on April 1, 2020.

Read More

Empty classroom.

School Discipline is a Public Health Crisis

By Thalia González, Alexis Etow, and Cesar De La Vega

Education is well-accepted as a key social determinant of health. It serves as a strong predictor of chronic disease, social and economic instability, incarceration, and even life expectancy. For example, by age 25, individuals with a high school degree can expect to live 11 to 15 years longer than those without one. Despite such evidence, education policies and practices have not been public health priorities. Too often, policies and practices in schools that create and compound health inequities are narrated and re-narrated as falling outside health law and policy. This is a missed opportunity for collective action to positively impact the future health pathways of children and communities.

In the wake of national protests against racialized police violence and COVID-19’s disproportionate impact on communities of color, the time has come for the health community — from researchers, to public health organizations, to advocates, to health care professionals — to move from simply affirming that racism is a public health crisis, to actively exposing how structural discrimination in education has fueled disparities and deepened the persistence of health inequities.

Read More

Sign that reads "Racism is a pandemic too."

The Two Pandemics Facing Asian Americans: COVID-19 and Xenophobia  

By Seema Mohapatra, JD, MPH

When there is an outbreak or emergency, reports of racism and xenophobia often follow.

But in recent pandemics, there have been concerted governmental efforts to thwart nativist attitudes and prejudice, using law as a tool.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, however, instead of trying to extinguish racist attitudes, the Trump administration has actually spearheaded ways to “other” Asian Americans.

Read More

Syringe and vials of vaccine.

Racial Inclusivity in COVID-19 Vaccine Trials

By Colleen Campbell

Recent calls for racial inclusivity in vaccine trials, which often rely on genetic rationales while emphasizing medical distrust among African Americans, unfortunately lack an equally robust critique of medical racism and the ongoing reasons for this distrust.

Even though race lacks genetic meaning, the COVID-19 discourse is rife with biological notions of race. Because of [g]enetics related to racial differences” African Americans must be involved in clinical trials, said Dr. Larry Graham in an NBC News article. He continued: “We must be sure it works in Black folks.” For this reason, companies like biotech firm Moderna are enlisting Black religious leaders to heavily recruit African American participants. They are also exploiting networks previously used for HIV clinical trials.

Read More

New York City, New York / USA - June 13 2020 New York City healthcare workers during coronavirus outbreak in America.

COVID-19 and the ‘Essential’ Yet Underappreciated Front-Line Health Care Worker 

By Kimani Paul-Emile

When considering those on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic response, most people likely envision doctors and nurses. However, there is an often forgotten, front-line workforce comprised of orderlies, nursing facility workers, and nursing assistants (“NAs”) that earns very little money, has few protections, and is largely Black and Brown and female. Many individuals in this group are also subject to a unique form of discrimination: rejection on the basis of their race or ethnicity by some of the very patients they are assigned to aid.

The millions of people who make up this group of essential workers constitute a substantial portion of the health care workforce and earn an average of $13.48 per hour despite the risks they take. Their work, which involves bathing, dressing, and feeding patients; brushing their teeth, and assisting with their use of the toilet, puts these workers at high risk of contracting COVID-19. Nevertheless, early in the pandemic, many of these workers lacked or had inadequate personal protective gear due to the tiered system used for distributing this equipment. Doctors and nurses were first in line for smocks, masks, and other essential gear; last were members of this underappreciated group of front-line health care workers.

Read More

Oxygen mask as part of artificial lungs ventilation machine in surgery room, closeup.

Arizona’s Crisis Standards of Care and Fair Allocation of Resources During COVID-19

By Govind Persad

As COVID-19 cases spiked in Arizona, the state activated its crisis standards of care, which provide triage guidelines if absolute scarcity arises.

Arizona has done the right thing by adopting crisis standards of care instead of leaving these decisions about ventilators to be made ad hoc by medical staff, which presents the risk both of arbitrary and biased decisions and of greater distress for clinical staff who are forced to make decisions without a guidance framework.

Arizona’s activation of its crisis standards of care stands in contrast to most other states’ response to the pandemic, including New York, which ultimately did not activate its crisis standards of care. Even though Arizona and other states have not yet reached the stage of absolute scarcity where triage policies are invoked—and hopefully will take steps to avoid reaching it—the move has prompted discussions about fair triage policies and criticisms from some community organizations.

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.

What the Supreme Court’s LGBT Discrimination Decision Means for Health Care

By Elizabeth Sepper

On Monday, the Supreme Court held in Bostock v. Clayton County that LGBT discrimination is sex discrimination under Title VII, the federal workplace protection of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The ruling comes in stark contrast to a recent action taken by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Just last Friday, HHS issued a new rule interpreting Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act so as to strip LGBT people of rights to nondiscrimination.

Since it was enacted in 2010, Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act has prohibited federally funded health programs, including insurers and health care providers, from discriminating based on the sex of patients. In 2016, the Obama Administration issued a rule making clear that transgender people and, to a lesser extent, LGB people were protected.

But under the Agency’s new interpretation, discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation is not sex discrimination.

In light of Monday’s Supreme Court decision, many are now wondering whether—and how—the new HHS rule interpreting Section 1557 of the ACA might be affected.

Read More