This Article examines the issues and questions which underlie the debate over the admission of “medical treatises” into evidence. The admissibility of this type of evidence is at issue most often in litigation involving complex medico-legal issues. This Article outlines the evidentiary basis for admission of medical treatises and discusses the quality of medical treatises in an effort to determine what value to the fact-finder these treatises actually hold. The authors contend that there is an inherent untrustworthiness associated with medical treatises, but do not go so far as to suggest that medical treatises should never be admitted. The Article concludes that there is a need for greater caution in determining admissibility and recommends safeguards to better guarantee trustworthiness and reliability.

A review of reports, bills and legislation from around the world, during the period from 1987 to 1991, reveals certain areas of consensus on the possible or actual, ethical and legal regulation of medically assisted conception. Other areas remain controversial, due not only to cultural and religious differences but also to the social significance of the very implementation of these new technologies. Irrespective of these differences, the reformulation of certain shared international principles of human rights permits a greater specificity both in their translation and in their application to medically assisted conception. Areas discussed include the dignity of the person, the security of human genetic material, the quality of services, the inviolability of the person and the inalienability of the person.

Current state laws regulating the licensure of dentists place severe restrictions upon the freedom of movement of practitioners. Most state laws were enacted during a period when a strong rationale for regulating public health and welfare existed. Today, these laws hamper the free movement of dentists and are anachronisms in an era of national standards and practices. The authors contend that the extant laws rest upon outdated assumptions and serve economic and protectionist goals rather than public health and safety.

This Article examines the history and application of the traditional justifications for state licensure and their present ramifications. The authors suggest that replacing the current regulatory system with a national clinical examination and a national licensure program will best serve the interests of the public and the dental profession.

This Article considers the influence and implications of the application of genetic technologies to definitions of disease and to the treatment of illness. The concept of “geneticization” is introduced to emphasize the dominant discourse in today's stories of health and disease and the social construction of biological phenomenon is described. The reassurance, choice and control supposedly provided by prenatal genetic testing and screening are critically examined, and their role in constructing the need for such technology is addressed. Using the stories told about prenatal diagnosis as a focus, the consequences of a genetic perspective for and on women and their health care needs are explored.

The pharmaceutical industry has long enjoyed substantial profits despite increased requirements for drug approval and various attempts to regulate the industry. Drug companies have avoided effective regulation by blaming high prices on the costs of research and development. The search for drugs effective in combatting HIV and AIDS related illnesses has provided a stark background on which to view the actions and justifications of drug companies. Despite increased cooperation between government and the drug industry and expedited approval of several useful drugs, these drugs are still prohibitively expensive. This Article explores the history and economics of the drug industry and proposes a system of national price regulation for all drugs.

As the climate of the health care industry has changed to one of cost-containment and competition through the growth of HMOs and PPOs, health care providers have become the subjects of antitrust litigation. One such case, Northwest Medical Laboratories v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Oregon, involved a medical laboratory and a radiology center who claimed that they were victims of an illegal group boycott after defendant's pre-paid health plan denied them preferred provider status. The Oregon Court of Appeals, using the traditional antitrust analysis applied to other industries for decades, failed to consider the intricacies that exist within the health care industry. This result led to an inaccurate market share computation and an inadequate rule of reason analysis. This Comment examines the shortcomings of the Northwest Medical opinion and argues that, in applying the antitrust laws to the health care industry, courts in future cases must recognize and respect the unique features of the business of providing health care.

The national abortion debate, rising drug use and homelessness, and the return to conservatism intersect in the trend which increasingly recognizes fetal rights, often at the expense of women's rights. Pregnant women, as never before, are faced with criminal charges and physical invasions in the name of protection of fetuses. This Note examines the sociological forces creating these situations and suggests better solutions. The Note cautions against the future fear that private parties will claim a legal right to interfere with a pregnant woman's behavior, and illustrates the need to prevent it.

Recent advances in molecular and behavioral genetics are providing theoretical models to explain complex behavior — learning disabilities and behavioral problems — in simple biological terms. There are intrinsic difficulties in interpreting genetic information. Yet genetic explanations are particularly appealing in school systems pressed by demands for efficiency and accountability. Thus, genetic explanations are affecting the way children are categorized in the schools. This Article reviews genetic advances bearing on educational issues and their implementation through biological tests. It suggests the social consequences and legal implications of the growing prevalence of genetic assumptions.

Recent surveys show an alarming rate of sexual exploitation of patients by psychotherapists. As such conduct often falls outside the scope of rape, which allows a defense of consent, the psychotherapist is not prosecuted. Although all sexual contact between therapist and patient is prohibited by codes of professional ethics, the licensing boards that enforce these codes do not possess adequate power to deter this behavior. Further, professional review boards have absolutely no authority over unlicensed therapists who sexually abuse their patients. As a result, licensed therapists who have been censured in one state may practice as unlicensed therapists in another state and continue to sexually abuse patients.

The only effective deterrent would be a uniform statute, adopted in all states, criminalizing this specific abuse of the unique therapist-patient relationship. Such a statute should include unlicensed therapists as potential offenders and consent to sexual contact should not be a defense. The statute also should provide for enhanced efforts to inform and protect victims. This Note first examines six of the nine criminal statutes that currently exist in order to show the full range of provisions presently in force to deter this conduct. This Note then proposes model provisions for a uniform statute.

This Article analyzes existing legal protections for the confidentiality of information collected through genetic screening or genetic monitoring in the workplace. It notes that there are a variety of protections, such as ethical codes for occupational physicians, statutes protecting health care information in the hands of the employers, and tort, contract and constitutional principles. It describes defenses to suits based on improper disclosure of medical information. The Article then analyzes legal bases for employee and third party access to the employee's genetic information. In response to gaps in existing legal protections, it suggests parameters for a model law protecting the confidentiality of genetic information collected in the workplace.

Over the past decade more than 1,000 "DES daughters" have filed lawsuits against the manufacturers of DES, alleging that their in utero exposure to the drug caused various reproductive tract abnormalities, including cancer. Plaintiffs now allege that their grandmothers' use of DES during pregnancy caused genetic damage leading to cancer in third generations. This Note addresses the validity of preconception tort liability in the context of third-generation DES cases. Plaintiffs in preconception tort liability cases have sought recovery under both negligence and strict liability causes of action. Courts should recognize the validity of preconception tort liability and allow a strict liability cause of action in third-generation cases.

Genetic discrimination is detrimental to public health programs, as well as to society generally. Advances in genetic testing and screening, accelerated and prompted by the Human Genome Initiative, increase society's ability to detect and monitor chromosomal differences. These technologies and their resulting genomic data will enhance medical science, but may also encourage discrimination. Although few employers or insurers currently utilize genetic screening, testing or data, rising employee benefit costs and market forces create powerful incentives for usage.

Current municipal, state and federal laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), may not sufficiently protect employees and insureds from genetic discrimination. While municipal and state protections should not be overlooked, the ADA's sweeping scope may currently provide the most comprehensive safeguard. Federal laws banning discrimination on the basis of race or sex might also successfully redress some forms of genetic discrimination. Genetic technologies’ advent necessitates efforts to rectify state and federal statutory coverage gaps, strictly regulate employers and produce comprehensive guidelines regarding its use.

Patents and other statutory types of market protections are used in the United States to promote scientific research and innovation. This incentive is especially important in research intensive fields such as the pharmaceutical industry. Unfortunately, these same protections often result in higher monopoly pricing once a successful product is brought to market. Usually this consequence is viewed as the necessary evil of an incentive system that encourages costly research and development by promising large rewards to the successful inventor. However, in the case of the AIDS drug Zidovudine (AZT), the high prices charged by the pharmaceutical company owning the drug have led to public outcry and a re-examination of government incentive systems.

This Note traces the evolution of these incentive programs — the patent system, and, to a lesser extent, the orphan drug program — and details the conflicting interests involved in their development. It then demonstrates how the AZT problem brings the interest of providing inventors with incentives for risky innovative efforts into a sharp collision with the ultimate goal of such systems: ensuring that the public has access to the resulting products at a reasonable price. Finally, the Note describes how Congress and the courts have attempted to resolve these problems in the past, and how they might best try to solve the AZT problem in the near future.