David Orentlicher

Orentlicher uses controversial life-and-death issues as case studies for evaluating three models for translating principle into practice. Physician-assisted suicide illustrates the application of "generally valid rules," a model that provides predictability and simplicity and, more importantly, avoids the personal biases that influence case-by-case judgments. The author then takes up the debate over forcing pregnant women to accept treatments to save their fetuses. He uses this issue to weigh the "avoidance of perverse incentives," an approach to translation that follows principles hesitantly for fear of generating unintended results. And third, Orentlicher considers the denial of life-sustaining treatment on grounds of medical futility in his evaluation of the "tragic choices" model, which hides difficult life-and-death choices in order to prevent paralyzing social conflict.

Making Moral Theory Work in Medical Ethics and the Law

Matters of Life and Death

Tamara K. Hervey

"Abstract: The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Health Law addresses some of the most critical issues facing scholars, legislators, and judges. How, for example, can the law protect against threats to public health that can quickly cross national borders? How can it ensure access to affordable health care or regulate the pharmaceutical industry? Indeed, when matters of life and death literally hang in the balance, it is especially important for policymakers to get things right, and the making of policy can be greatly enhanced by learning from the successes and failures of approaches taken in other countries. Where there are "common challenges" in law and health, there is much to be gained from experiences elsewhere. Accordingly, this Handbook considers key health law questions from a comparative perspective. In health law, common challenges are frequent. In addition to those mentioned above, there are questions about addressing the social determinants of health (e.g., poverty and pollution), organizing health systems to optimize use of available resources, ensuring that physicians provide care of the highest quality, protecting patient privacy in a data-driven world, and properly balancing patient autonomy with the interest in preserving life when reproductive and end-of-life decisions are made. This Handbook's wide scope and comparative perspective on health law are particularly timely. Economic globalization has made it increasingly important for different countries to harmonize their legal rules. The many paired and complementary chapters that cover law in American and European contexts represent a novel approach that should allow scholars, students, and policymakers to develop new insight into this complex field. Keywords: health law; comparative law; EU law; UK law; US law; public health; healthcare; social determinants of health; public policy"--

The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Health Law

“Many Americans are unsatisfied with politics. Simultaneously, we are hesitant to question the basic soundness of our constitutional system. In this refreshingly provocative book, David Orentlicher explains why it is due time for us to reconsider dominant ideas about the presidency, now arguably our most powerful political institution. Challenging the conventional wisdom that the best executive is necessarily a unitary executive, Orentlicher makes a wonderful case for why ‘two presidents are better than one.’ Sure to be of interest to political scientists, legal scholars, as well as informed citizens justifiably worried about the fate of American democracy, this fascinating book dares to challenge everything you thought you knew about one of our favorite political institutions.”—William E. Scheuerman, Indiana University “Can Orentlicher be serious in calling for a plural executive? The answer is yes, and he presents thoughtful and challenging arguments responding to likely criticisms. Any readers who are other than completely complacent about the current state of American politics will have to admire Orentlicher’s distinctive audacity and to respond themselves to his well-argued points.”—Sanford Levinson, author of Framed: America’s 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance When talking heads and political pundits make their “What’s Wrong with America” lists, two concerns invariably rise to the top: the growing presidential abuse of power and the toxic political atmosphere in Washington. In Two Presidents Are Better Than One, David Orentlicher shows how the “imperial presidency” and partisan conflict are largely the result of a deeper problem—the Constitution’s placement of a single president atop the executive branch. Accordingly, writes Orentlicher, we can fix our broken political system by replacing the one person, one-party presidency with a two-person, two-party executive branch. Orentlicher contends that our founding fathers did not anticipate the extent to which their checks and balances would fail to contain executive power and partisan discord. They also did not foresee how the imperial presidency would aggravate partisan conflict. As the stakes in presidential elections have grown ever higher since the New Deal, battles to capture the White House have greatly exacerbated partisan differences. Had the framers been able to predict the future, Orentlicher argues, they would have been far less enamored with the idea of a single leader at the head of the executive branch and far more receptive to the alternative proposals for a plural executive that they rejected. Like their counterparts in Europe, they might well have created an executive branch in which power is shared among multiple persons from multiple political parties. Analyzing the histories of other countries with a plural executive branch and past examples of bipartisan cooperation within Congress, Orentlicher shows us why and how to implement a two-person, two-party presidency. Ultimately, Two Presidents Are Better Than One demonstrates why we need constitutional reform to rebalance power between the executive and legislative branches and contain partisan conflict in Washington.

The Case for a Bipartisan Executive Branch

Two Presidents Are Better Than One

Mark A. Hall

I. Glenn Cohen

Mary Anne Bobinski

Financial and ethical issues are integrated into this concise and engaging treatment of Bioethics and Public Health Law. The complex relationship between patients, providers, the state, and public health institutions are explored through high-interest cases, informative notes, and compelling problems. The updated Fourth Edition includes recent cases and developments in biotechnology, including stem cell research and gene patents, and updates to HIPPA coverage, DNA research, and bio-banks. Discussions of confidentiality and informed consent include new legislative and judicial responses to posthumous reproduction and the challenges arising from international reproductive tourism.

Bioethics and Public Health Law

Nicholas Bagley

Health Care Law and Ethics, Ninth Edition offers a relationship-oriented approach to health law—covering the essentials, as well as topical and controversial subjects. The book provides thoughtful and teachable coverage of every aspect of health care law. Current and classic cases build logically from the fundamentals of the patient/provider relationship to the role of government and institutions in health care. The book is adaptable to both survey courses and courses covering portions of the field. Key Features: New authors Nick Bagley and Glenn Cohen Incorporated anticipated changes to the Affordable Care Act More current cases and more streamlined notes, including ones on medical malpractice, bioethics, and on finance and regulation More coverage of “conscientious objection” and “big data” - Discussion of new “value based” methods of physician payment - Expanded coverage of “fraud and abuse” Current issues in public health (e.g., Ebola, Zika) and controversies in reproductive choice (e.g., Hobby Lobby) Coverage of cutting-edge genetic technologies (e.g., gene editing and mitochondrial replacement)

Health Care Law and Ethics

Philosophical debates over the fundamental principles that should guide life-and-death medical decisions usually occur at a considerable remove from the tough, real-world choices made in hospital rooms, courthouses, and legislatures. David Orentlicher seeks to change that, drawing on his extensive experience in both medicine and law to address the translation of moral principle into practice--a move that itself generates important moral concerns. Orentlicher uses controversial life-and-death issues as case studies for evaluating three models for translating principle into practice. Physician-assisted suicide illustrates the application of ''generally valid rules,'' a model that provides predictability and simplicity and, more importantly, avoids the personal biases that influence case-by-case judgments. The author then takes up the debate over forcing pregnant women to accept treatments to save their fetuses. He uses this issue to weigh the ''avoidance of perverse incentives,'' an approach to translation that follows principles hesitantly for fear of generating unintended results. And third, Orentlicher considers the denial of life-sustaining treatment on grounds of medical futility in his evaluation of the ''tragic choices'' model, which hides difficult life-and-death choices in order to prevent paralyzing social conflict. Matters of Life and Death is a rich and stimulating contribution to bioethics and law. It is the first book to examine closely the broad problems of translating principle into practice. And by analyzing specific controversies along the way, it develops original insights likely to provoke both moral philosophers and those working on thorny issues of life and death.

David Orentlicher

About

Books

Join the club