LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 10 of total 14

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: Abortion Shield Laws.

    Cohen, David S / Donley, Greer / Rebouché, Rachel

    NEJM evidence

    2023  Volume 2, Issue 4, Page(s) EVIDra2200280

    Abstract: Abortion Shield LawsThe overturning ... ...

    Abstract Abortion Shield LawsThe overturning of
    MeSH term(s) Pregnancy ; Female ; Humans ; Abortion, Legal ; Abortion, Induced
    Language English
    Publishing date 2023-03-28
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article ; Review
    ISSN 2766-5526
    ISSN (online) 2766-5526
    DOI 10.1056/EVIDra2200280
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  2. Article ; Online: Understanding Shield Laws.

    Cohen, David S / Donley, Greer / Rebouché, Rachel / Aubrun, Isabelle

    The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics

    2023  Volume 51, Issue 3, Page(s) 584–591

    Abstract: In anticipation of extraterritorial application of antiabortion laws, many states have enacted laws that attempt to shield abortion providers, helpers, and patients from civil, professional, or criminal liability associated with legal abortion care. This ...

    Abstract In anticipation of extraterritorial application of antiabortion laws, many states have enacted laws that attempt to shield abortion providers, helpers, and patients from civil, professional, or criminal liability associated with legal abortion care. This essay analyzes and compares the statutory schemes of the seven early adopting shield states: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York. After describing what the laws do and how they operate, we offer reflections on coming disputes, areas of legal uncertainty, and ways to improve future shield laws.
    MeSH term(s) Pregnancy ; Female ; Humans ; United States ; Abortion, Induced ; Connecticut ; Illinois ; Massachusetts ; New York
    Language English
    Publishing date 2023-12-13
    Publishing country England
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 1168812-9
    ISSN 1748-720X ; 1073-1105 ; 0277-8459
    ISSN (online) 1748-720X
    ISSN 1073-1105 ; 0277-8459
    DOI 10.1017/jme.2023.103
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  3. Article: Encouraging Maternal Sacrifice: How Regulations Governing the Consumption of Pharmaceuticals During Pregnancy Prioritize Fetal Safety over Maternal Health and Autonomy.

    Donley, Greer

    Review of law and social change. New York University

    2014  Volume 39, Issue 1, Page(s) 45–88

    Abstract: Pregnant women are routinely faced with the stressful decision of whether to consume needed medications during their pregnancies. Because the risks associated with pharmaceutical drug consumption during pregnancy are largely unknown, pregnant women both ... ...

    Abstract Pregnant women are routinely faced with the stressful decision of whether to consume needed medications during their pregnancies. Because the risks associated with pharmaceutical drug consumption during pregnancy are largely unknown, pregnant women both inadvertently consume dangerous medications and avoid needed drugs. Both outcomes are harmful to pregnant women and their fetuses. This unparalleled lack of drug safety information is a result of ill-conceived, paternalistic regulations in two areas of the law: regulations governing ethical research in human subjects and regulations that dictate the required labels on drugs. The former categorizes pregnant women as "vulnerable" and thus precludes them from most medical research. The result is that ninety-one percent of drugs lack any reliable safety information for pregnant consumers. The latter currently requires all drug labels to encourage drug avoidance during pregnancy, despite ample evidence that avoiding needed medications can harm pregnant women. On June 30, 2015, new pregnancy labeling regulations took effect. Though these regulations make important improvements, they continue to treat pregnant women unlike any population, including other unique subpopulations, such as children. As a result, the new regulations do not fix the problem of over-warning pregnant women about the risks of drug consumption. This article questions the legitimacy of both regulations and suggests three reforms for how to improve access to vital safety information: (1) amend the regulations governing ethical research in human subjects to reclassify pregnant women as non-vulnerable adults; (2) create incentives to generate safety data in pregnant women by granting a period of market exclusivity for drug companies that invest in this research; and (3) make the FDA pregnancy labeling regulations consistent with the routine FDA practice of requiring the display of balanced, human data on risk.
    MeSH term(s) Drug Approval/legislation & jurisprudence ; Drug Labeling/legislation & jurisprudence ; Drug Therapy/ethics ; Ethics, Research ; Female ; Fetus ; Humans ; Maternal Health/legislation & jurisprudence ; Patient Safety/legislation & jurisprudence ; Personal Autonomy ; Pregnancy ; Pregnant Women ; Research/legislation & jurisprudence ; Research Design/legislation & jurisprudence ; United States ; Vulnerable Populations/legislation & jurisprudence
    Language English
    Publishing date 2014
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article
    ISSN 0048-7481
    ISSN 0048-7481
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  4. Article: The legal and medical necessity of abortion care amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Donley, Greer / Chen, Beatrice A / Borrero, Sonya

    Journal of law and the biosciences

    2020  Volume 7, Issue 1, Page(s) lsaa013

    Abstract: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare. Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care. In this short paper, we argue that abortion ... ...

    Abstract In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare. Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care. In this short paper, we argue that abortion should not fall under any state's non-essential healthcare order. Major medical organizations recognize that abortion is essential healthcare that must be provided even in a pandemic, and the law recognizes abortion as a time-sensitive constitutional right. Finally, we examine the constitutional arguments as to why enforcing these orders against abortion providers should not stand constitutional scrutiny. We conclude that no public health purpose can be served by this application because abortion uses less scarce resources and involves fewer contacts with healthcare professionals than prenatal care and delivery assistance, which is continuing to be provided in this public health emergency.
    Keywords covid19
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-04-29
    Publishing country England
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 2756090-9
    ISSN 2053-9711
    ISSN 2053-9711
    DOI 10.1093/jlb/lsaa013
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  5. Article ; Online: The impact of US abortion policy on rheumatology clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of rheumatologists.

    Bermas, Bonnie L / Blanco, Irene / Ramsey-Goldman, Rosalind / Blazer, Ashira D / Clowse, Megan E B / Edens, Cuoghi / Donley, Greer / Pierce, Leslie / Wright, Catherine / Birru Talabi, Mehret

    Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.)

    2023  Volume 76, Issue 3, Page(s) 485–486

    MeSH term(s) Female ; Pregnancy ; Humans ; Rheumatology ; Rheumatologists ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Abortion, Induced
    Language English
    Publishing date 2023-10-16
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Letter
    ZDB-ID 2756371-6
    ISSN 2326-5205 ; 2326-5191
    ISSN (online) 2326-5205
    ISSN 2326-5191
    DOI 10.1002/art.42699
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  6. Article: The legal and medical necessity of abortion care amid the COVID-19 pandemic

    Donley, Greer / Chen, Beatrice A. / Borrero, Sonya

    Journal of law and the biosciences

    Abstract: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care In this short paper, we argue that abortion should ...

    Abstract In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care In this short paper, we argue that abortion should not fall under any state's non-essential healthcare order Major medical organizations recognize that abortion is essential healthcare that must be provided even in a pandemic, and the law recognizes abortion as a time-sensitive constitutional right Finally, we examine the constitutional arguments as to why enforcing these orders against abortion providers should not stand constitutional scrutiny We conclude that no public health purpose can be served by this application because abortion uses less scarce resources and involves fewer contacts with healthcare professionals than prenatal care and delivery assistance, which is continuing to be provided in this public health emergency
    Keywords covid19
    Publisher WHO
    Document type Article
    Note WHO #Covidence: #690432
    Database COVID19

    Kategorien

  7. Book ; Online: The Legal and Medical Necessity of Abortion Care Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

    Donley, Greer / Chen, Beatrice / Borrero, Sonya

    Articles

    2020  

    Abstract: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare. Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care. In this short paper, we argue that abortion ... ...

    Abstract In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare. Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care. In this short paper, we argue that abortion should not fall under any state’s non-essential healthcare order. Major medical organizations recognize that abortion is essential healthcare that must be provided even in a pandemic, and the law recognizes abortion as a time-sensitive constitutional right. Finally, we examine the constitutional arguments as to why enforcing these orders against abortion providers should not stand constitutional scrutiny. We conclude that no public health purpose can be served by this application because abortion uses less scarce resources and involves fewer contacts with healthcare professionals than prenatal care and delivery assistance, which is continuing to be provided in this public health emergency.
    Keywords Reproductive Rights ; Abortion ; Fourteenth Amendment ; Constitutional Law ; Health Law ; Public Health Law ; Pandemic Response ; Civil Liberties ; Civil Rights and Discrimination ; Epidemiology ; Health Law and Policy ; Infectious Disease ; Law and Gender ; Obstetrics and Gynecology ; Sexuality and the Law ; Women's Health ; covid19
    Subject code 340 ; 170
    Publishing date 2020-01-01T08:00:00Z
    Publisher Scholarship@PITT LAW
    Publishing country us
    Document type Book ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  8. Article ; Online: The legal and medical necessity of abortion care amid the COVID-19 pandemic

    Donley, Greer / Chen, Beatrice A / Borrero, Sonya

    Journal of Law and the Biosciences

    2020  Volume 7, Issue 1

    Abstract: Abstract In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare. Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care. In this short paper, we argue that ... ...

    Abstract Abstract In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, states have ordered the cessation of non-essential healthcare. Unfortunately, many conservative states have sought to capitalize on those orders to halt abortion care. In this short paper, we argue that abortion should not fall under any state’s non-essential healthcare order. Major medical organizations recognize that abortion is essential healthcare that must be provided even in a pandemic, and the law recognizes abortion as a time-sensitive constitutional right. Finally, we examine the constitutional arguments as to why enforcing these orders against abortion providers should not stand constitutional scrutiny. We conclude that no public health purpose can be served by this application because abortion uses less scarce resources and involves fewer contacts with healthcare professionals than prenatal care and delivery assistance, which is continuing to be provided in this public health emergency.
    Keywords covid19
    Language English
    Publisher Oxford University Press (OUP)
    Publishing country uk
    Document type Article ; Online
    ZDB-ID 2756090-9
    ISSN 2053-9711
    ISSN 2053-9711
    DOI 10.1093/jlb/lsaa013
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    More links

    Kategorien

  9. Article ; Online: Making the case for talking to patients about the costs of end-of-life care.

    Donley, Greer / Danis, Marion

    The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics

    2011  Volume 39, Issue 2, Page(s) 183–193

    Abstract: Costs at the end of life disproportionately contribute to health care costs in the United States. Addressing these costs will therefore be an important component in making the U.S. health care system more financially sustainable. In this paper, we ... ...

    Abstract Costs at the end of life disproportionately contribute to health care costs in the United States. Addressing these costs will therefore be an important component in making the U.S. health care system more financially sustainable. In this paper, we explore the moral justifications for having discussions of end-of-life costs in the doctor-patient encounter as part of an effort to control costs. As health care costs are partly shared through pooled resources, such as insurance and taxation, and partly borne by individuals through out-of-pocket expenses, we separate our defense for, and approach to, discussing both pooled and individual aspects of cost. We argue that there needs to be a shift away from formulating the options as a dichotomous choice of paying attention to end-of-life costs versus ignoring such costs. The question should be how personal costs will be managed and how societal expenditures should be allocated. These are issues that we believe patients care about and need to have addressed in a manner with which they are comfortable. Conversations about how money will be spent at the end of life should begin before the end is near. We propose discussing costs from the onset of chronic illness and incorporating financial issues in advance care planning. Through these approaches one can avoid abruptly and insensitively introducing financial issues at the very conclusion of a person's life when one would prefer to address the painful and important issues of spiritual and existential loss that are appropriately the focus when a person is dying.
    MeSH term(s) Communication ; Cost Control ; Cost Sharing ; Financing, Personal ; Health Care Costs ; Humans ; Patient Education as Topic ; Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ; Physician-Patient Relations ; Terminal Care/economics ; Terminally Ill/psychology ; United States
    Language English
    Publishing date 2011-07-27
    Publishing country England
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 1168812-9
    ISSN 1748-720X ; 1073-1105 ; 0277-8459
    ISSN (online) 1748-720X
    ISSN 1073-1105 ; 0277-8459
    DOI 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00587.x
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

  10. Article: Prenatal whole genome sequencing: just because we can, should we?

    Donley, Greer / Hull, Sara Chandros / Berkman, Benjamin E

    The Hastings Center report

    2012  Volume 42, Issue 4, Page(s) 28–40

    MeSH term(s) Female ; Genetic Counseling ; Genetic Testing/ethics ; Genome, Human/genetics ; Health Policy ; Humans ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Pregnancy ; Prenatal Diagnosis/ethics ; Sequence Analysis, DNA/ethics ; United States
    Language English
    Publishing date 2012-06-20
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 194940-8
    ISSN 1552-146X ; 0093-0334
    ISSN (online) 1552-146X
    ISSN 0093-0334
    DOI 10.1002/hast.50
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

To top