HealthLawProf Blog

Editor: Katharine Van Tassel
Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Wednesday, March 30, 2022

Faith Seeking Understanding: Trends in Freedom of Religion in the United States

Perry Dane (Rutgers), Faith Seeking Understanding: Trends in Freedom of Religion in the United States, La liberté de religion en question(s) (Anne Fornerod, ed. 2022) (forthcoming):

This essay on trends in American constitutional doctrine on religion and state is one of only two English-language chapters in a French volume on freedom of religion. The essay closely examines recent cases on the establishment of religion, religious institutional autonomy, and free exercise of religion. The common thread throughout is the conviction that the law of freedom of religion is not like other questions of liberal constitutionalism. It is as much about the normative and juridical sovereignty of religious institutions, communities, and traditions as it is about recognizing the rights of believers. It is related to robust conceptions of legal pluralism. And it is ultimately about a genuinely existential encounter between religion and state – an encounter in which each party tries as best it can to make sense of the reality and the claims of the other. The essay is also written, though, in the shadow of our current polarized age. It worries about religious communities that have allowed their beliefs to be co-opted by raw expressions of political identity. It insists that no religious community can just gather itself in pristine isolation. And, looking beyond the legal forum, it hopes for the possibility of a robust conversation about our collective moral sensibilities, including at least to some extent our common public theology. For that too is part of what it means to engage in a genuinely existential encounter.

March 30, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Regulatory Shifting Baseline Syndrome: Vaccines, Generational Amnesia, and the Shifting Perception of Risk in Public Law Regimes

Robin Kundis Craig (USC), Regulatory Shifting Baseline Syndrome: Vaccines, Generational Amnesia, and the Shifting Perception of Risk in Public Law Regimes, 21 Yale J. Health Pol’y Ethics (forthcoming, summer 2022):

Vaccination mandates have been controversial since long before COVID-19, but the current COVID controversies obscure a more pervasive problem for U.S. public health laws and vaccine-preventable diseases than the intense politicization surrounding the pandemic. Until the late 20th century, for most people the risk of various dread diseases was sufficiently high that they embraced new vaccines. The intentional result of federal and state vaccination policies was that fewer people got these diseases. The perverse result was that perceptions of disease risk shifted, making the vaccines themselves seem like the far riskier option to many people and pressures to eliminate or mitigate vaccination mandates increased. Perhaps most importantly, in the early 21st century, state legislatures increasingly enacted exemptions from school vaccination requirements, setting the stage for measles resurgences in 2015 and 2019.

Continue reading

March 30, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Expired and Unwanted Pharmaceuticals: The Hidden Environmental Legacy of COVID-19

Jie Han (Xi’an Jiaotong University), Shanshan He (Institute of Global Environmental Change), Expired and Unwanted Pharmaceuticals: The Hidden Environmental Legacy of COVID-19, SSRN (2022):

While concerns have been raised on the discharge of sanitary wastes containing antiviral drugs and metabolites, which are often inadequately treated at municipal wastewater treatment plants and pose threats to the receiving aquatic environments, a wider and potentially more far-reaching issue has been overlooked. The enormous quantities of pharmaceuticals dispensed to or purchased by the general public that are left unused or expired throughout the COVID-19 pandemic may have created an unintended yet massive legacy of potent bioactive substances that are destined for the environment. These include expired, unused (e.g., from recovered or deceased owners), and excess pharmaceuticals due to over-prescription, patient incompliance, panic buying, or stockpiling (i.e., hoarding). Without proper management and regulatory oversight, these may culminate an ecological disaster given their enormous quantities and prominent toxicities to aquatic and terrestrial biota.

March 30, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

There's No Such Thing as Independent Creation, and It's a Good Thing, Too

Christopher Buccafusco (Yeshiva University), There's No Such Thing as Independent Creation, and It's a Good Thing, Too, William & Mary L. Rev. (2022):

Independent creation is the foundation of U.S. copyright law. A work is only original and, thus, copyrightable to the extent that it is independently created by its author and not copied from another source. And a work can be deemed infringing only if it is not independently created. Moreover, independent creation provides the grounding for all major theoretical justifications for copyright law. Unfortunately, the doctrine cannot bear the substantial weight that has been foisted upon it. This Essay argues that copyright law’s independent creation doctrine rests on a set of discarded psychological assumptions about memory, copying, and creativity. When those assumptions are replaced with contemporary accounts of how human memory influences the creative process, the independent creation doctrine becomes empirically meaningless. Independent creation, as copyright law understands it, does not exist.

Continue reading

March 30, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, March 29, 2022

University of Pennsylvania to Present Symposium on Health Law and Anti-Racism; March 30, 2022 at 12:30p.m. Eastern.

University of Pennsylvania to Present Symposium on Health Law and Anti-Racism; March 30, 2022 at 12:30p.m. Eastern.

The symposium will launch a special issue of the  American Society for Law, Medicine & Ethics Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics

PHILADELPHIA (March 17, 2022) – The University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine’s Department of Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Penn’s Center for Technology, Innovation and Competition (CTIC), and the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, alongside the American Society for Law, Medicine & Ethics (ASLME) and the University of
California Irvine’s Center for Biotechnology and Global Health Policy (UCI), will present Health Law and Anti-Racism: Reckoning and Response, a hybrid on-campus and virtual symposium on March 30, 2022, from 12:30-5:30 pm ET. The event is free and open to the public. In-person and virtual attendees will be eligible to receive up to 4.0 ethics CLE credits and free ASLME membership.

Law and racism are intertwined, with legal tools potentially serving as instruments of oppression or equity. Distinguished experts in law, medicine, public health, and medical ethics will discuss the racial dimensions of health law and policing (mental health, substance use
disorders); industry and the environment (food advertising, environmental racism); health care and research (disability, diverse inclusion in research); anti-racist teaching and practice (building interprofessional curricula, medical-legal partnerships); and more.

The event will introduce a special issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics featuring contributions from symposium panelists. The special issue is open access through April 2022 and can be accessed here.


Screen Shot 2022-03-28 at 3.33.16 PMDelivering the opening address, “Amplifying Racial Justice Through Bioethics in the 21st Century,” will be the Penn Provost’s Distinguished Visiting Faculty Fellow Michele Bratcher Goodwin Chancellor’s Professor of Law and founding director of the Center for Biotechnology and Global Health Policy at the University of California, Irvine

 

For the full symposium agenda, registration link, and additional information, go here.

Please note that in-person seating is limited.

WHAT:  Health Law and Anti-Racism: Reckoning and Response

WHEN:  Wednesday, March 30, 12:30 pm – 5:30 pm ET

WHERE:  World Forum at Perry World House, 3803 Locust Walk, Philadelphia
(limited seating), with a virtual option

IN-PERSON OR VIRTUAL REGISTRATION: https://medicalethicshealthpolicy.med.upenn.edu/events/health
-law-and-anti-racism-symposium

(This program has been approved for 4.0 ethics CLE credits for Pennsylvania lawyers.)

March 29, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

How the Mantra of Informed Consent in the Canadian Assisted Dying Debate Obscures Somatic Oppression

Trudo Lemmens (University of Toronto), How the Mantra of Informed Consent in the Canadian Assisted Dying Debate Obscures Somatic Oppression, 52 U.B.C. L. Rev. 241 (2020):

This JOTWELL contribution reviews Jonas-Sébastien Beaudry's paper "Somatic Oppression and Relational Autonomy: Revisiting Medical Aid in Dying through a Feminist Lens". Beaudry, so the commentary puts forward, gives us an insightful sketch of how societal attitudes towards disability, ageing and struggling with illness may concretely interfere with people’s ability to make autonomous decisions, and particularly so in the context of a seriously constrained health care context. Beaudry’s analysis should inspire a questioning of the expressivist impact of a legislative endorsement of the medical profession’s role in actively ending the lives of people with disabilities who are otherwise not close to death, based on inherently complex concepts of autonomy and suffering. Canadian law now explicitly endorses in legislation the perception (a self-perception but one which clearly—as convincingly argued by Beaudry—is influenced by context and other-perception) that a life with disability is more likely unbearable, lacking in dignity, and without further purpose, than the lives of others.

March 29, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Impact Of Digital Rights And Digital Rights Violations On Persons With Disabilities

Bizibrains Okpeh (Nigerian Bar Association), Impact Of Digital Rights And Digital Rights Violations On Persons With Disabilities, SSRN (2021):

There is no gainsaying that digitalisation has become one of the hallmarks of the 21st Century. Human interactions, commercial and social activities are increasingly being digitalised so much so that human existence is fast becoming intrinsically linked, integrated, or connected with “digital life”. This has been made possible by the advancement in Internet and Communication Technology (ICT) and the Internet of Things (IoT), which ensures the continuing development and invention of new smart technologies, applications, and software to facilitate, and in some instances anchor, human communications, interactions, and transactions, with more than 100 billion devices or applications now connected to the internet (Ford online news), sometimes creating “new and complex” rights, and dynamic perspective in human rights discourse often referred to as digital rights.

Continue reading

March 29, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Waiving Windfalls: The Socio-Legal and Contextual Justification of a 'TRIPS Waiver' during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Akshat Agrawal (Independent), Waiving Windfalls: The Socio-Legal and Contextual Justification of a 'TRIPS Waiver' during the COVID-19 Pandemic, SSRN (2021):

Distributive concerns in respect of IP, especially in the context of pharmaceuticals, are nothing new. The histories of inequity in bargaining towards a multilateral agreement as well as in its implementation has been widely documented. However, with the COVID-19 pandemic, and its gruesome, rather focally visible, impact on access to health, there ought to be a shift in conversation beyond IP internalism, questioning the fundamental inequities which come with TRIPS.

Continue reading

March 29, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, March 28, 2022

Pandemics, Travel Restrictions, and the Distancing from International Law

Fernando Dias Simões (The Chinese University of Hong Kong), Pandemics, Travel Restrictions, and the Distancing from International Law:

History shows that governments confronted with a pandemic tend to impose travel restrictions. This tradition was taken to unprecedented extremes in response to COVID-19. However, contrary to common perceptions, travel restrictions are not effective and at most delay the peak of a pandemic by a few days or weeks. The International Health Regulations (hereinafter “IHR”) were created to strike a balance between the protection of public health and the maintenance of international mobility. Yet, States Parties almost universally disregarded the Regulations, imposing measures that only added to the economic and social disruption caused by the pandemic. In recent months, “social distancing” became a household expression. This article argues that the widespread implementation of travel restrictions during the COVID-19 crisis is also a symptom of a different type of distancing—that of states from their international law obligations. It examines some potential explanations for the astonishingly high rate of non-compliance with the IHR and urges states to take their international law obligations more seriously.

March 28, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Negative Impact of COVID-19 on the Enjoyment of Legal Freedoms

Alain Ebi Abangma (University of Buffalo), The Negative Impact of COVID-19 on the Enjoyment of Legal Freedoms, 9(3) Int’l J. Soc. Sci. Humanities Research 467-471 (2021):

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus. Most people infected with the COVID-19 virus experience mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment. Older people and those with underlying medical problems like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, and cancer are more likely to develop serious illness. The disease was discovered in December 2019. On 31st December 2019, a series of pneumonia cases of unknown cause was detected in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). COVID-19 has caused States to restrict movements, closed down schools, major markets and churches and thus the virus has serious impact on the enjoyment of legal freedoms. Covid-19 has very devastating effects on economic activities generally and thus the urgent need to reduce the spread but the situation in Cameroon is difficult to handle as the negative impacts of the virus are further compounded by lack of support from the government to boost economic activities like supporting small businesses with funding and reducing taxes for big enterprises so as to reduce costs and encourage production. The general objective of this paper is to critically examine the negative impact of COVID-19 on the enjoyment of legal freedoms. One of the main findings of the paper is that Cameroon as a State committed to the protection of its citizens’ rights has ratified treaties protecting human rights of people including legal freedoms and thus to eradicate the impact COVID-19 has on these legal freedoms, the work strongly recommends that as disease outbreaks are not likely to disappear in the near future, proactive international actions are required to not only save lives but also protect economic prosperity.

March 28, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Measuring Constitutional Loyalty: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic

Jerg Gutmann (University of Hamburg), Roee Sarel (University of Hamburg), Stefan Voigt (University of Hamburg), Measuring Constitutional Loyalty: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic, SSRN (2022):

Constitutional loyalty, the importance ascribed to complying with constitutional rules, is difficult to measure across countries due to differences in context, history, and culture. We overcome this challenge by exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic as an ideal setting in which societies around the world face a novel and similar public health crisis, inducing governments to adopt comparable policies. Based on a survey carried out in 53 countries around the world in 2021, we show that citizens’ support for COVID-19 mitigation policies declines if courts signal doubts about their constitutionality. We further demonstrate that this effect of constitutional loyalty depends on citizens’ characteristics, such as their confidence in the courts and their moral convictions.

March 28, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Webinar Hosted by the Law-Med Center at Case Western Reserve University School of Law - New Commitment Pathway for Offenders with Serious Mental illness: Expedited Diversion to Court-Ordered Treatment (EDCOT); March 30, 2022 at 12:00 p.m. Eastern.

Webinar Hosted by the Law-Med Center at Case Western Reserve University School of Law -  New Commitment Pathway for Offenders with Serious Mental illness: Expedited Diversion to Court-Ordered Treatment (EDCOT); March 30, 2022 at 12:00 p.m. Eastern.

Over the last 50 years, as public hospital beds have diminished without offsetting increases in community services and supports, individuals with mental disorders have increasingly been arrested, jailed and punished.  In many states, defendants thought to incompetent to stand trial wait months for assessment or treatment, only to eventually have their cases dismissed. About a quarter of arrestees have serious disorders and it has been estimated that more than 800,000 individuals with mental illness are under correctional control at any given time. “Decriminalizing mental illness” has become a standard plank in progressive proposals for overhaul of the “criminal legal system.”

Professor Richard J. Bonnie will present and defend “Expedited Diversion to Court-Ordered Treatment” (EDCOT), a formal statutory diversion process for offenders with serious mental illness. As a civil commitment proceeding accompanied by dismissal of criminal charges, EDCOT would not entail a waiver of criminal trial rights and could be invoked even if the defendant lacks trial competence. EDCOT would also be available to authorize civil hospitalization of offenders who are not immediately able to function successfully in the community. These provisions, coupled with mandated compliance with outpatient treatment and judicial supervision, would enable diversion of many, perhaps most, offenders with serious mental disorders into a treatment system that could provide acute services, discharge planning, and problem-solving management in the community.

Our Presenter:

Bonnie_richard_0  

Richard J. Bonnie

Harrison Foundation Professor of Medicine and Law

University of Virginia School of Law

 

Bonnie is Harrison Foundation Professor of Medicine and Law and director of the Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy at the University of Virginia. He has co-authored leading textbooks on criminal law and public health law and has devoted special attention during his career to public policies relating to mental health and substance abuse. His first book, “The Marijuana Conviction: A History of Marijuana Prohibition in the United States” (1974) was republished in 1999 as a “drug policy classic.”

Bonnie has been involved in public service throughout his career.  Among other positions, he has been associate director of the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse (1971‑73) and secretary of the first National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse (1976–80). He recently chaired a Commission on Mental Health Law Reform at the request of the chief justice of Virginia (2006–11) and is currently chairing an Expert Advisory Panel on Mental Health Reform for the Virginia General Assembly.

Bonnie was elected to the National Academy of Medicine in 1991 and has chaired more than a dozen studies for the National Academies on subjects ranging from elder mistreatment to underage drinking, including the landmark report, “Ending the Tobacco Problem: A Blueprint for the Nation” (2007). In 2017, he chaired a study on policies needed to address the opioid epidemic in the United States and is now chairing a study on using knowledge about adolescent development to advance the well-being of all adolescents regardless of social background.

Bonnie has ­served as an adviser to the American Psychiatric Association (APA) since 1979, received the APA’s Isaac Ray Award in 1998 for contributions to forensic psychiatry and special presidential commendations in 2003 and 2016 for service to American psychiatry. He has also served on three MacArthur Foundation research networks, including, most recently, Law and Neuroscience. He is also a consultant to the American Academy of Neurology’s Committee on Ethics, Law and Humanities.

Bonnie received the University of Virginia’s highest honor, the Thomas Jefferson Award, in 2007.

Register now for the March 30 webinar.

 

 

March 28, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, March 26, 2022

Executive Lawmaking and COVID-19 Public Health Orders in Canada

Shaun Fluker (University of Calgary), Lorian Hardcastle (University of Ottawa), Executive Lawmaking and COVID-19 Public Health Orders in Canada, 25(2) Rev. Const. Stud. 145 (2021):

The primary public health response to COVID-19 has been social and economic lockdowns, which have varied across Canada in scope, timing, and duration. These measures have included social distancing, quarantine, masking, school closures, business closures, gathering restrictions, closed borders, and travel restrictions. In most provinces and territories these requirements have been enacted in public health orders issued by a chief medical officer, relying on discretionary authority delegated to them in public health legislation.

Continue reading

March 26, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Our Digital Footprint under COVID-19: Should We Fear the UK Digital Contact Tracing App?

Audrey Guinchard (University of Essex), Our Digital Footprint under COVID-19: Should We Fear the UK Digital Contact Tracing App?, Int’l Rev. L. Computers & Tech. (2020):

With the objective of controlling the spread of the coronavirus, the UK has decided to create and, in early May 2020, was live testing a digital contact tracing app, under the direction of NHS X, a joint unit of NHS England and NHS Improvement. In parallel, NHS X has been building the backend datastore, contracting a number of companies. While the second iteration of the app should integrate a more privacy-friendly design, the project has continued to be criticised for its potential to increase government surveillance beyond the pandemic and for purposes other than tracing the spread of the virus.

Continue reading

March 26, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Prescribing Unapproved Medical Devices? The Case of DIY Artificial Pancreas Systems

Joseph T.F. Roberts (University of Birmingham), Victoria Moore (University of Manchester), Muireann Quigley (University of Birmingham), Prescribing Unapproved Medical Devices? The Case of DIY Artificial Pancreas Systems, 21(1) Med. L. Int’l. 42-68 (2021):

In response to slow progress regarding technological innovations to manage type 1 diabetes, some patients have created unregulated do-it-yourself artificial pancreas systems (DIYAPS).Yet both in the United Kingdom(UK)and internationally, there is an almost complete lack of specific guidance–legal, regulatory, or ethical–for clinicians caring for DIYAPS users. Uncertainty regarding their professional obligations has led to them being cautious about discussing DIYAPS with patients, let alone recommending or prescribing them. In this article, we argue that this approach threatens to undermine trust and transparency. Analysing the professional guidance from the UK regulator–the General Medical Council–we demonstrate that nothing within it ought to be interpreted as precluding clinicians from initiating discussions about DIYAPS. Moreover, in some circumstances, it may require that clinicians do so. We also argue that the guidance does not preclude clinicians from prescribing such unapproved medical devices.

March 26, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Resolving End-of-Life Treatment Conflicts: Comparing the COP in England to Analogous Mechanisms in Ontario, California, and Texas

Thaddeus Mason Pope (Queensland University of Technology), Resolving End-of-Life Treatment Conflicts: Comparing the COP in England to Analogous Mechanisms in Ontario, California, and Texas, SSRN (2021):

This brief article for the Open Justice Court of Protection Project compares the UK Court of Protection to analogous dispute resolution mechanisms in Canada and the United States.

All three mechanisms resolve the small subset of conflicts that are intractable to informal and intramural processes such as mediation and clinical ethics consultation. And while all three mechanisms adjudicate issues other than end-of-life treatment disputes, these may be the most consequential type of case. I compare how each mechanism affords procedural due process in terms of (1) neutrality, (2) transparency, and (3) competence.

March 26, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, March 24, 2022

Legal Age

Alexander A. Boni-Saenz (Chicago-Kent College of Law), Legal Age, 63 Boston Coll. L. Rev. (2022):

How old are you? This deceptively simple question has a clear answer in the law, which is a number measuring the amount of time that has elapsed since birth. However, as scientists discover various biomarkers of human aging and individuals openly embrace more fluid identities, this chronological definition will soon have to compete with biological and subjective alternatives. Legal scholars have previously examined the role of age in the legal system, but they have done so assuming a chronological definition. This is the first Article to examine critically the antecedent question of how we should define legal age after one has reached adulthood. The stakes for this definition are high. Age is ubiquitous in the legal landscape, appearing in the Constitution, antidiscrimination statutes, criminal laws, and public benefits programs. This Article normatively assesses the chronological, biological, and subjective conceptions of age, examining how well they improve the accuracy of the legal system, impact administrative costs, promote autonomy interests, and further antisubordination goals. It then charts three potential paths forward for legal age: abolishing age as a meaningful legal category for adults, particularizing the definition of legal age based on context, and reforming the chronological status quo through the calibration of existing age-based law.

March 24, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

'Professional' Employers and the Transformation of Workplace Benefits

Natalya Shnitser (Boston College), 'Professional' Employers and the Transformation of Workplace Benefits, 39 Yale J. Reg. Bulletin 99 (2021):

Workers in the United States depend on their employers for a host of benefits beyond wages and salary. From retirement benefits to health insurance, from student loan repayment to dependent-care spending plans, from disability benefits to family and medical leave, U.S. employers play a uniquely central role in the financial lives of their employees. Yet not all employers are equally willing or capable of serving as such financial intermediaries. Larger employers commonly offer more and better benefits than smaller employers. In recent years, so-called Professional Employer Organizations (PEOs) have pitched themselves as a private-sector solution to the challenges traditionally faced by smaller employers. PEOs have pioneered and marketed a “co-employment” model pursuant to which a business and the PEO agree to share certain employer rights and responsibilities, with the PEO taking on all of the human resources matters and the client-employer otherwise retaining control over the business.

Continue reading

March 24, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Colonial Fault Lines: First Nations Autonomy and Indigenous Lands in the Time of COVID-19

Alexandra Flynn (Allard School of Law), Signa A. Daum Shanks (York University), Colonial Fault Lines: First Nations Autonomy and Indigenous Lands in the Time of COVID-19, 102(3) Studies Pol’y Econ. 248 (2021):

The COVID-19 crisis has exposed the political and economic fault lines in the exercise of power across multiple jurisdictions. This article focuses on the power of First Nations to make enforceable decisions in respect to reserve lands, specifically the powers First Nations have to enforce public health restrictions during the pandemic. We argue that Canadian law both enables First Nations to assert decisionmaking in respect to their lands, and undermines Indigenous authority in relation to enforcement and intergovernmental status. This paper is part of the SPE Theme on the Political Economy of COVID-19.

March 24, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Goldilocks Conundrum: Disclosing Discrimination Risks in Informed Consent

Anya Prince (University of Iowa), Sonia M. Suter (George Washington University), Wendy Uhlmann (University of Michigan), Aaron Scherer (University of Iowa), The Goldilocks Conundrum: Disclosing Discrimination Risks in Informed Consent, SSRN (2021):

Informed consent is a foundational ethical and legal principle in human subjects research and clinical care. Yet, there is extensive debate over how much information must be disclosed to meet ethical goals and legal requirements, especially about non-medical risks. In this online, survey-based experiment of a diverse sample of the US general population, we explored one aspect of this debate by testing whether the level of detail included in informed consent regarding genetic anti-discrimination protections alters individuals’ willingness to participate in a hypothetical research study and their concerns regarding genetic discrimination. Participants were randomized to receive sample informed consent language with one of three levels of disclosure regarding the protections and limitations of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimation Act (GINA). Our sample (n=1195) had a mean age of 45.9 (SD=17.9) years and 40% with ≤ high school education. It was 51.3% female and 36.7% non-Hispanic White. On average, those who received consent language with none of GINA’s limitations highlighted were more willing to participate than those who were warned about various gaps in GINA. They also had significantly lower perceived risk of discrimination than those presented with the most information about limitations. Our study found that providing more comprehensive information about GINA notably increased discrimination concerns and lessened willingness to participate in the hypothetical studies, highlighting the need for clinicians and researchers to thoughtfully consider how to disclose anti-discrimination risks in informed consent.

March 24, 2022 | Permalink | Comments (0)