Search

Background: In the last decades all health systems have experienced a lack of resources. Against this background, the idea of ​​applying personal responsibility of the patient as a criterion for allocation of resources (PRCAR) is gaining increasing attention. Bulgarian healthcare reform has been marked by the implementation of many new strategies, that grounded our scientific interest towards investigating PRCAR in Bulgarian public health law and social legislation., Methods: Through a search of national legal databases 7 documents were selected and subjected to content analysis., Results: Prospective responsibility was found in two and retrospective responsibility - in three documents, two of which imposed explicit penalties on the patient. Two documents did not distinguish between the types of patient responsibility. PRCAR was found to be controversial through the prism of the social justice principle. The discussion was conducted through the perspectives of evidence translation of research to law, particularities of social cohesion in Bulgaria, and the interpretation of principles of public health ethics., Conclusion: Although PRCAR was traceable in Bulgarian legislation, no supporting arguments for its introduction were deduced. The applicability of PRCAR should be further studied and wider public debate should be initiated., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Union activism, medical lobbying and occupational health and safety prosecutions led to a major public health initiative in Australia - the banning from 1 July 2024 of work with engineered/artificial stone, including manufacturing, supplying, processing and installing it. This editorial contextualises within the history of regulation of workers' exposure to risks of contracting silicosis the growing international awareness of the dangers posed by working with engineered stone, particularly in relation to making and installing kitchen and bathroom benchtops made from engineered stone. It argues that the Australian initiative is an important public health decision that has a sound justification, is likely to save many lives and should be emulated internationally., Competing Interests: None.

This paper summarizes key shifts in judicial decisions relating to public health powers during the pandemic and the implications of those decisions for public health practice. Then, it gives a preview and call for partnership in developing a legal framework for authority that guides public health to better activities, processes, and accountability in service of the public's health.

Public health laws and policies are uniquely able to mitigate the adverse and inequitable health impacts of climate change. This article summarizes some key considerations in developing such laws and policies and a variety of approaches local public health departments are using to increase climate resilience and health equity.

Tribal Epidemiology Centers (TECs) are an essential and unique part of the public health system and an important part of federal efforts to improve the health status of American Indian and Alaska Native people. Pursuant to federal statute, TECs serve the 574 federally recognized Tribes (hereinafter, "Tribes") and their members across the United States, as well as American Indian and Alaska Native people in general. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for timely, complete, and accurate public health data, particularly for American Indian and Alaska Native communities and others who may have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. This article reviews the history and importance of TECs and federal statutes governing TECs' ability to access and use protected health information for public health purposes. TECs and Tribes often encounter difficulty receiving public health data from state and federal agencies despite their designation as "public health authorities" under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and associated regulations. Limited access to this information hinders the statutory mission of TECs as well as Tribal monitoring of and response to public health threats such as SARS-CoV-2. Agency acknowledgment and compliance with current federal law regarding data sharing with TECs are essential to improve data access and the fragile public health of Tribal communities.

Background: Despite the discovery of vaccines, the control, and prevention of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) relied on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). This article describes the development and application of the Public Health Act to implement NPIs for COVID-19 pandemic control in Uganda., Methods: This is a case study of Uganda's experience with enacting COVID-19 Rules under the Public Health Act Cap. 281. The study assessed how and what Rules were developed, their influence on the outbreak progress, and litigation. The data sources reviewed were applicable laws and policies, Presidential speeches, Cabinet resolutions, statutory instruments, COVID-19 situation reports, and the registry of court cases that contributed to a triangulated analysis., Results: Uganda applied four COVID-19 broad Rules for the period March 2020 to October 2021. The Minister of Health enacted the Rules, which response teams, enforcement agencies, and the general population followed. The Presidential speeches, their expiry period and progress of the pandemic curve led to amendment of the Rules twenty one (21) times. The Uganda Peoples Defense Forces Act No. 7 of 2005, the Public Finance Management Act No. 3 of 2015, and the National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management supplemented the enacted COVID-19 Rules. However, these Rules attracted specific litigation due to perceived infringement on certain human rights provisions., Conclusions: Countries can enact supportive legislation within the course of an outbreak. The balance of enforcing public health interventions and human rights infringements is an important consideration in future. We recommend public sensitization about legislative provisions and reforms to guide public health responses in future outbreaks or pandemics., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

This contribution marks a dual milestone at the intersection of public health law and JLME: my 50th publication of a substantive manuscript in the 50th anniversary of the Journal in 2022. In recognition of these coinciding landmarks, this installment of the Public Health Law column for JLME features observations and reflections of the field based largely on prior publications.

The Basic Healthcare and Health Promotion Law 2019 became the new constitution of China's health system in June 2020, giving legal effect to ambitious health reform programmes like Healthy China 2030. The concurrent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 must not distract us from appreciating the fact that this Law will comprehensively overhaul the health regulatory framework of the world's most populous country during the coming decade, if not beyond. This article offers an original evaluation of the Law in its political context. The Law commendably promises to safeguard the right to health, assist citizens to live a 'complete cycle of life', and promote health using the resources of the public health system. However, it is also deeply politicised, guaranteeing extensive and penetrative political control in health campaigns, digitalised health data, the governance of health institutions, and the resolution of medical disputes. This can be explained by the consequential roles played by epidemics in China's historical dynastic cycles, but even more so by powerful tendencies of centralisation on the part of the Leninist Party-state. The Law's potential is thus subject to the overriding caveat that the Party-state's existence and influence over law and public health must be secured., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press; All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

During the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, governments in all jurisdictions (except New South Wales) have declared states of emergency and exercised powers under their public health emergency legislation. Highly restrictive measures have been introduced pursuant to the exercise of such powers. Extraordinary government action demands strong accountability. This section piece reviews the public health emergency legislation in all Australian jurisdictions and finds that inadequate accountability mechanisms are embedded in the statutes. This section piece demonstrates that there is insufficient transparency around the decisions being made by the Executive under the public health emergency powers. The section piece also reveals that there are very few options built into the public health emergency legislation for review of executive action for its legality, meritoriousness and fairness., Competing Interests: None.

This article analyzes the Supreme Court's "shadow docket" Free Exercise cases relating to COVID-19. The paper highlights the decline of deference, the impact of exemptions, and the implications of the new doctrine for vaccine and other public health laws.

In early February of 2020, attention was drawn to the increased number of deaths and the new cases of coronavirus infection. The epicentre of the outbreak was Wuhan in the People's Republic of China. In order to control the outbreak, Chinese leaders called on the city authorities in Wuhan to set up mass quarantine centres for infected people. The Chinese government took this step to protect the public against infectious disease. This is an example of the conflicts between public health and civil liberties/individual rights. Government authority is the pillar of the public health law. The government retains the power to achieve and maintain common good by restricting - within solid international and national limits - individual rights concerning autonomy, privacy, association, and liberty. Public health agencies have the right to collect, use, and disclose a considerable amount of personal health information and to enforce certain vaccinations, medical examinations, and treatments. In addition to the power to isolate individuals to protect the public against the spread of infectious disease, their powers can be used to control businesses and professions. There are several legal interventions to prevent injury and disease and promote the public's health. Among these tools are taxing policies, which encourage engaging in beneficial behaviour (fruit consumption) and disincentives to engage in high-risk activities (smoking).

Population health monitoring and reporting provides regular and up-to-date information on health outcomes and its determinants. The outputs of population health monitoring aim to inform policymakers and other stakeholders to develop fact-based decisions. Population health monitoring is located at the national, but also federal state and county level. This paper describes the legal basis for population health monitoring in the federal states' public health acts as well as current challenges and possibilities for further development from a federal state and county perspective on population health monitoring.A legal basis for population health monitoring on the federal state and county level exists for almost all federal states in Germany. The level of detail of these laws varies in terms of responsibility, periodicity of population health monitoring and reporting, content, and designated use. Population health monitoring needs to respond to challenges in the areas of population health monitoring resources, data sources, (intersectoral) reporting, and impact. Practical examples illustrate how the challenges can be handled and further development can take place.Based on its solid legal basis, being a routine task, and its close link to the living conditions of the population, population health monitoring on the federal state and county level has the possibility for cocreating public health at the grassroots level and to be a pioneer for health equity.

Accurate, up-to-date data are the bedrock of effective public health responses, including in the context of the suffering caused by COVID-19. Any action to inhibit the compilation of such data has ramifications locally, nationally and internationally, and risks impairing the global capacity to respond to the virus. This article contextualises the decision of the government of President Bolsonaro of Brazil to reduce the accessibility of contemporary data about COVID-19 infections in Brazil within his views about, and responses to, the virus. It identifies the nature of actions taken to suppress such data by the Brazilian Ministry of Health and then scrutinises a decision by De Moraes J of Brazil's High Court in Sustainability Network v The President of the Republic of Brazil (ADPF 690 MC/DF, 8 June 2020), which quashed the attempted suppression of public health data. The article hails the decision as an important public health law precedent., Competing Interests: None.

Background: A resilient health system is inevitable in attaining the health-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). One way of strengthening health systems is improving the coverage of public health laws for better health governance. The aim of this study is to describe the public health law situation in the Western Pacific Region and analyse the association of public health law coverage with health-related SDGs statistics., Methods: A total of 33 Western Pacific countries were selected and analysed using a multi-group ecological study design. Public health law coverage was measured from April 2013 to October 2016 based on the public health law coverage module in the 'Tool to Assess Health Law' developed by the WHO Western Pacific Regional Office and Asian Institute for Bioethics and Health Law of Yonsei University. The health-related SDGs status were examined using health statistics data from World Health Statistics 2017 and 2018 by WHO and SDGs index scores of previous research., Results: Countries with high public health law coverage were Vietnam, Republic of Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Low coverage countries were mainly Pacific Island countries. High public health law coverage issues were health care organisation, communicable diseases, and substance abuse, whereas those of low coverage were human reproduction, family health, and oral health. Public health law coverage was associated with health-related SDGs statistics such as life expectancy at birth (r = 0.47, p = 0.03), health life expectancy at birth (r = 0.47, p = 0.04), health-related SDGs index (r = 0.43, p = 0.05). Among the SDG 3 indicators, maternal mortality ratio (r = - 0.53, p = 0.01), neonatal mortality rate (r = - 0.44, p = 0.02), new HIV infections (r = 0.78, p = 0.04), total alcohol consumption (r = 0.45, p = 0.02), adolescent birth rate (r = - 0.40, p = 0.04), UHC service coverage index (r = 0.50, p = 0.02), and IHR average core capacity score (r = 0.54, p = 0.004) were statistically meaningful. However, there was no association of public health law coverage with health statistics in other SDGs., Conclusions: This study proved the importance of public health law in supporting the attainment of health-related SDGs. These results should be used as the basis for review and action at country level in improving public health law for better health systems, consequently achieving health-related SDGs.

Vaccine-hesitant parents are often portrayed as misinformed dilettantes clinging to unscientific Internet chatter and a debunked study that linked the MMR vaccine and autism. While this depiction may be an accurate portrayal of a small (but vocal) subset, scholars have unearthed a more complex picture that casts vaccine hesitancy in the context of broader notions of lack of trust in government and industry. At the same time, commentators have highlighted limitations of the vaccine injury compensation program and US Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg have argued that preemption laws that provide vaccine manufacturers with broad legal immunities create "a regulatory vacuum in which no one ensures that vaccine manufacturers adequately take account of scientific and technological advancements when designing or distributing their products." In short, the discussions surrounding vaccine hesitancy that dominate public discourse detract from serious debate as to whether amendments to vaccine-related laws can address the limitations of the existing framework governing immunizations. This commentary examines these issues through a public health law lens., (Copyright © 2016 by Duke University Press.)

Public health law has roots in both law and science. For more than a century, lawyers have helped develop and implement health laws; over the past 50 years, scientific evaluation of the health effects of laws and legal practices has achieved high levels of rigor and influence. We describe an emerging model of public health law that unites these two traditions. This transdisciplinary model adds scientific practices to the lawyerly functions of normative and doctrinal research, counseling, and representation. These practices include policy surveillance and empirical public health law research on the efficacy of legal interventions and the impact of laws and legal practices on health and health system operation. A transdisciplinary model of public health law, melding its legal and scientific facets, can help break down enduring cultural, disciplinary, and resource barriers that have prevented the full recognition and optimal role of law in public health.

The 'nanny state' has become a popular metaphor in debates about public health regulation. It fulfils a particular role in that debate: to caution government against taking action. This paper presents case studies of nanny state criticisms, using them to identify a series of contextual features that may assist in better understanding, evaluating and where appropriate, resisting the rhetorical force of nanny state criticisms. The case studies presented include Rush Limbaugh's reactions to Michelle Obama's efforts to encourage American food companies to market healthier food to children; Christopher Hitchens' critique of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's public health policies; and the reaction of neoliberal think tanks to Australia's plain tobacco packaging legislation. These case studies do not provide a basis for making generalisations about the practice of 'nanny state name-calling'. Nor do they preclude debate about the appropriate limits of government action. However, in appropriate cases they may assist policy-makers and public health advocates to contest the framing of public health interventions as unwarranted incursions into the private lives of individuals. One important lesson from these case studies is that the principal concern of nanny state critics is not loss of freedom as such, but the role of the state. The nanny state critique is ultimately a call for the state to be agnostic about the health of citizens, allowing market forces to dominate. Although the nanny state critique is not new, it is a significant challenge to government efforts to address lifestyle-influenced risk factors for non-communicable diseases, including tobacco use, harmful use of alcohol, and unhealthy diet., (Copyright © 2015 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

In the sprawling American political debates over obesity, which date back a decade and a half, 'nanny state' has been a rhetorical cudgel used to oppose those seeking even modest state action to address rising obesity rates. This essay explores obesity policy through the prism of state involvement, focusing on four possible types of response to what virtually all those involved--physicians and nutritional scientists, public-health advocacy groups, even food industry executives--agree is a serious threat to individual and collective health., (Copyright © 2015 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Law has played an important, but largely constitutive, role in the development of the public health enterprise. Thus, law has been central to setting up the institutions and offices of public health. The moral agenda has, however, been shaped to a much greater extent by bioethics. While social justice has been placed at the heart of this agenda, we argue that there has been little place within dominant conceptions of social justice for gender equity and women's interests which we see as crucial to a fully realised vision of social justice. We argue that, aside from particular interventions in the field of reproduction, public health practice tends to marginalise women-a claim we support by critically examining strategies to combat the HIV pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa. To counter the marginalisation of women's interests, this article argues that Amartya Sen's capabilities approach has much to contribute to the framing of public health law and policy. Sen's approach provides an evaluative and normative framework which recognises the importance of both gender and health equity to achieving social justice. We suggest that domestic law and international human rights provisions, in particular the emerging human right to health, offer mechanisms to promote capabilities, and foster a robust and inclusive conception of social justice.

The article focuses on the legal functions of public health professionals and their sort of training need to do that work. Topics include how law pervades public health practice and research, 5 essential public health law services (5EPHLS) framework that serves to specify the skills and knowledge that public health professionals need to carry out their law-related work, and skills and expertise that graduates of public health programs should have to manage legal matters in public health.

Law and the legal environment are important factors in the epidemiology and prevention of sexually transmissible infections (STIs) and blood-borne viruses (BBVs). However, there has been no sustained effort to monitor the legal environment surrounding STIs and BBVs. This article presents the first data on the incidence and impacts of unmet legal needs for those affected by an STI or BBV in Australia using a survey administered to a sample of the Australian sexual health and BBV workforce. Migration, Housing, Money/Debt, Health (including complaints about health services), and Crime (accused/offender) were reported as the five most common legal need areas, with 60% of respondents describing these legal problems as generating a "severe" impact on health. These results indicate that unmet legal needs generate significant negative impacts in terms of individual health, on public health, and the ability to provide sustainable services such as testing and treatment to those facing unmet legal needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As teen dating violence (TDV) has gained attention as a public health concern across the United States (US), many efforts to mitigate TDV appear as policies in the 50 states in the form of for programming in K-12 schools. A keyword search identified 61 state-level school-based TDV policies. We developed an abstraction form to conduct a content analysis of these policies and generated descriptive statistics and graphic summaries. Thirty of the policies were original and 31 were additions or revisions of policies enacted by 17 of the 30 states previously. Of a possible score of 63, the minimum, mean, median, and maximum scores of currently active policies were 3.0, 17.7, 18.3, and 33.8, respectively. Results revealed considerable state-to-state variation in the presence and composition of school-based TDV policies. Opportunity for improving policies was universal, even among those with most favorably scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australian, New Zealand, English and Canadian courts have made a number of orders, often in the context of parenting disputes, requiring children to be vaccinated. Complementary therapy options have generally not been permitted as an alternative to mainstream vaccination. Debates about parental entitlements to make decisions about such matters have taken place in the context of contested family law litigation during the COVID-19 era. However, by contrast with Ontario Superior Court of Justice decisions in 2022, a series of Australian decisions, including the judgment of Sutherland CJ in Clay & Dallas [2022] FCWA 18, have developed the law further, having regard to both the capacity of a minor to consent to vaccination and reviewing a variety of factors going to children's best interests at different junctures during the pandemic, finding it generally to be in the best interests of children to receive COVID-19 vaccinations. This is likely to flow back into curial decision-making about vaccinations more broadly, as well as cognate matters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The public health laws are passing through a process churning in the COVID-19 pandemic in India. The effectiveness of quarantine law under 160 years old Indian Penal Code, 1860, and 123 years old Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 proved short-lived euphoria in controlling horrendous COVID-19 pandemic. The nation-wide Lockdowns on the ground of Sections 6, 10, 38, and 72 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, provided significant assistance in dealing with formidable challenges of COVID-19. The execution of these laws revealed the safety and security of public health professionals and the delivery system to high vulnerability. Therefore, the President of India promulgated the Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 declaring 'act of violence' cognizable and non-bailable with high deterrent value. The paper explores the range of normative choices in refurbishing the public health laws beyond the command and control approach evidenced in Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020, to therapeutic perception public health and equity in India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As countries face public health emergencies, building public health capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to threats is a priority. In recent years, national public health institutes (NPHIs) have emerged to play a critical role in strengthening public health systems and to accelerate and achieve implementation of the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005). NPHIs are science-based government institutions that provide national leadership and expertise for the country's efforts to protect and improve health. Providing a Legal Framework for a National Public Health Institute is a recently released Africa CDC publication intended to support NPHI development throughout Africa. Here we present a legal mapping analysis of sampled legal domains for 5 countries, using the "Menu of Considerations for an NPHI Legal Framework." The analysis delineates the types of legal authorities countries may use to establish or enhance NPHIs and demonstrates how legal mapping can be used to review legal instruments for NPHIs. It also demonstrates variability among legal approaches countries take to establish and enable public health functions for NPHIs. This article examines how the legal framework and menu of considerations can help countries understand the nuances around creating and implementing the laws that will govern their organizations and how countries can better engage stakeholders to identify or address potential areas for opportunity where law may be used as a tool to strengthen public health infrastructure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As public health promotion and protection become increasingly complex and integrated into various fields, public health law is emerging as an important tool for public health professionals. To ensure that public health professionals are effectively trained in public health law principles and theories, educators, trainers, and others who develop educational curricula should integrate public health law-related competencies into their training and workforce development efforts. This article provides three competency models developed by the Public Health Law Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: (a) the public health emergency law competency model, (b) the public health law competency model, and (c) the legal epidemiology competency model. These competency models provide a foundation upon which public health law curricula can be developed for governmental, nongovernmental, and academic public health practitioners. Such standardization of public health law curricula will ameliorate not only the training, but also selection and evaluation of public health practitioners, as well as better align public health training with national public health efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article describes the issues involved in information blocking, which includes the 21st Century Cures Act that was signed into law on December 13, 2016. The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act passed by U.S. Congress in 2009 is discussed. Concerns posed by information blocking for patient health are mentioned. Congress authorized the Office of the Inspector General to investigate allegations of information blocking.

Recourse to litigation and positive judicial interventions is one of the most effective tools to meet public health objectives. The present review envisions compiling litigation and judicial measures in Southeast Asia Region (SEAR) while assessing their role in advancing smokeless tobacco (SLT) control, and equally highlighting, how tobacco industry has used litigation to undermine tobacco control efforts in the Region. The litigation, especially from the SEAR, up to 2017, that have facilitated SLT control or have been used by the tobacco industry to challenge an SLT control policy decision were reviewed. Most of the litigation related to SLT control from the Region are on pictorial health warnings. Bhutan has imposed a complete prohibition on sale, manufacture and import of all kinds of tobacco products and the litigation there relates to the prosecution of offenders for violating the ban. Judiciary in the Region is well informed about the ill-effects of tobacco use and remains positive to tobacco control initiatives in the interest of public health. In India, several SLT-specific litigation helped in better regulation of SLT products in the country. Litigation has compelled governments for effective enforcement of the domestic tobacco control laws and the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). Parties to the WHO FCTC must now use Treaty Article 19 to strengthen their legal procedures and make the tobacco industry liable, for both criminal and civil wrongs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Where the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) seeks to accelerate progress toward a world safe and secure from public health emergencies, the realization of GHSA 'Action Packages' will require national governments to establish necessary legal frameworks to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease. By analyzing the scope and content of existing national legislation in each of the GHSA Action Packages, this comparative cross-national research has developed a framework that disaggregates the legal domains necessary to meet each Action Package target. Based upon these legal domains, this study developed an assessment tool that can identify specific attributes of national legislation. This article applies this tool to assess the legal environment in twenty Sub-Saharan African countries, examining the content of laws across the GHSA Action Packages, analyzing the legal domains necessary to implement each Action Package, and highlighting specific national laws that reflect attributes of each legal domain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]