By Neşe Devenot
Since the 2022 publication of “Preparing for the Bursting of the Psychedelic Hype Bubble,” a JAMA Psychiatry Viewpoint by David Yaden and colleagues, a wave of scholarship and commentaries has emphasized the ethical importance of nuanced science communication about the still-nascent field of psychedelic medicine.
By Maayan Sudai
Joanna Wuest’s Born This Way: Science, Citizenship, and Inequality in the American LGBTQ+ Movement describes the evolution of the “born this way” framework through pivotal moments in the history of the LGBTQI+ movement.
A central theme of the book’s analysis is the role that “certainty” and “uncertainty” play in the legitimation of science-based policy regarding sexuality and gender issues. Uncertainty of what might happen has been pitted against LGBTQI+ reforms, from when conservative researchers and practitioners argued the exposure of young children to an openly gay guardian or schoolteacher could be harmful (p.92), to present-day attempts to leverage uncertainty to block trans access to sex-segregated bathrooms, prisons, and shelters (p.181).
By Matthew Chun
In a recent paper in Science Advances, researchers have proposed using neuroscientific data from brain scans to “improv[e] the state of evidence-based legal decision-making” in trademark infringement cases. But can — and more importantly, should — such evidence be used? In this blog post, I will review the federal legal standards for trademark infringement, describe the researchers’ proposed use of neuroscientific evidence in trademark litigation, and assess the benefits and limitations of adopting such an approach.
By April Shaw and Taleed El-Sabawi
The COVID-19 pandemic and recent increases in the incidence of televised violence against Black persons by law enforcement actors and others have contributed to the worsening mental health of these subordinated and marginalized communities. While the policy solutions needed to address this disparate impact are structural and multi-faceted, the introduction of 988, a national mental health crisis hotline, offers an opportunity to positively contribute to the overall goals of decreasing police interactions with Black and Brown communities.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Final Rule designating 988 as a national suicide prevention and mental health crisis hotline in September 2020. Congress later passed the National Suicide Hotline Designation Act of 2020 codifying 988 as the dialing code. Per the FCC Final Rule, states are required to implement 988 into their networks by July 2022.
States have wide latitude in how they implement 988, and though many will likely stop at the bare minimum of creating a suicide prevention hotline, 988 could be coupled with the creation of police alternative (or non-police) mobile responses that assist with de-escalation, stabilization, and connection to treatment. Non-police responses promise to decrease police interaction, excessive use of force, and criminalization of mental illness. Such non-police responses have gained in national popularity due in large part to organization and protests led by Black Lives Matters activists.
By Neşe Devenot, Emma Tumilty, Meaghan Buisson, Sarah McNamee, David Nickles, and Lily Kay Ross
Amid accelerating interest in the use of psychedelics in medicine, a spate of recent exposés have detailed the proliferation of abuse in psychedelic therapy, underscoring the urgent need for ethical guidance in psychedelic-assisted therapies (P-AT), and particularly relating to touch and consent.
Acknowledging the need for such guidance, McLane et al. outline one set of approaches to touch in a recent Journal of Medical Ethics blog. However, we find their piece at odds with the available information in the fields of P-AT and psychotherapy. We explain three major concerns: consent and autonomy, risk mitigation, and evidence and reasoning. In our view, these concerns merit a precautionary approach to touch in P-AT, given the current state of research on touch-based interventions.
By Jennifer J. Carroll and Taleed El-Sabawi
People who use drugs continue to die at staggering rates, due not only to overdose from contaminated drug supply, but also due to our persistent reliance on the carceral system to respond to behavioral health crises.
This approach stems from the state-sanctioned violence of the War on Drugs. It takes various forms, including the use of police officers as first responders to behavioral health crises (including welfare checks), the excessive police use of force, and the use of potentially lethal restraint methods to subdue agitated persons. It also manifests in police officers’ use of jail cells as tools for forced “detox” believing that coerced withdrawal while in custody will reduce overdose risk or help someone “go clean” (it very clearly does not).
Evidence-based alternatives to police response for behavioral health crises exist. However, despite being both feasible and effective, these alternatives to police intervention remain the exception, rather than the rule.
By Carly Roberts
Supervised injection sites, also known as safe injection sites, are among the most effective, evidence-based harm reduction tools available to counter the opioid overdose crisis.
Supervised injection sites are legally sanctioned locations that provide a hygienic space for people to inject pre-obtained drugs under the supervision of trained staff. Safe injection sites often provide additional services including needle exchanges, drug testing (especially important for detecting lethal fentanyl-laced drugs and preventing “mass overdose” events), and referral to treatment and social services.
The opioid overdose crisis in the U.S., which had a death toll of over 45,000 in 2018, and which is predicted to worsen amid the COVID-19 pandemic, warrants a bold, brave, and thorough response. Harm reduction programs, including supervised injection sites, should be integrated into opioid epidemic response strategies in order to save lives and improve individual and community outcomes.
By Katie Moran-McCabe and Scott Burris
Florence Nightingale once said, “The connection between health and the dwellings of the population is one of the most important that exists” — a statement that is as true today as it was at the turn of the 20th century. A decent dwelling and diverse communities, where there is access to transportation, good schools, shops, parks, socioeconomic mixture, social capital and collective efficacy, and economic opportunity are all features necessary for both a high-level and equitable distribution of well-being.
The promise of healthy housing and communities, however, falls short in the United States. Much of the housing in the U.S. is expensive, unsafe, and inadequate in supply. Read More
By Alex Stein
Whether a medical publication – a book or an article – can be used in court as evidence for its truth is determined by the “learned treatise” exception to the hearsay rule. This exception provides that a court can admit into evidence an excerpt from a treatise or periodical when it “is called to the attention of an expert witness on cross-examination or relied on by the expert on direct examination” and when “the publication is established as a reliable authority by the expert’s admission or testimony, by another expert’s testimony, or by judicial notice.” Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18) and its state equivalents.
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts has recently narrowed this exception. Read More
By Timo Minssen
I am pleased to announce two new publications on (1) “European patent strategies under the UPCA” and (2) “Synthetic Biology & Intellectual Property Rights”:
1) Minssen, T & Lundqvist, B 2014, ‘The ”opt out” and “opt-in” provisions in the Unified Patent Court Agreement – Impact and strategies for European patent portfolios‘ , published in N I R (Nordic IP Review), vol 2014, nr. 4, s. 340-357.
Abstract: Many questions concerning the UPC’s jurisdiction during the transitional period for European Patents under Article 83 UPCA remain unsolved. Focusing on the “opt in” and “opt out” choices under Article 83 (3) & (4), this paper discusses the legal nature and prerequisites of these provisions, as well as the options and strategic choices that patent proprietors and applicants are facing. Considering the pros and cons of the emerging unitary system in light of a persisting uncertainty of how to interpret relevant stipulations, it is emphasized that there will be no clear-cut solutions. Rather the suitability of each approach will have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, taking into account all circumstances surrounding an invention, its patent-claims and the underlying business strategy. Recognizing that the worst thing to do is to do nothing at all, we conclude with a summary and some general remarks.