Friday, March 24, 2023
ISSN 2765-8767
  • Survey
  • Podcast
  • Write for Us
Daily Remedy
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcasts
    A conversation with Kristen Ogden, patient advocate for Dr. David Bockoff

    A conversation with Kristen Ogden, patient advocate for Dr. David Bockoff

    March 19, 2023
    Analyzing opioid prescribing trends with Mr. Jacob James Rich

    Analyzing opioid prescribing trends with Mr. Jacob James Rich

    March 19, 2023
    A conversation with Dr. John Whyte, author of Take Control of Your Heart Disease Risk

    A conversation with Dr. John Whyte, author of Take Control of Your Heart Disease Risk

    March 19, 2023
    We catch up with Dr. Linda Cheek to glean her thoughts on the DEA's continuing encroachment into healthcare in a post-Ruan world.

    Catching up with Dr. Linda Cheek, founder of Doctors of Courage

    March 19, 2023
    A conversation with Dr. Radhika Sharma, physician influencer and life coach

    A conversation with Dr. Radhika Sharma, physician influencer and life coach

    February 18, 2023
    A conversation with Dr. Alin Gragossian, physician and heart transplant survivor

    A conversation with Dr. Alin Gragossian, physician and heart transplant survivor

    February 13, 2023
  • Surveys

    Surveys

    Does inflation affect your spending

    Does inflation affect how you use your deductible?

    by Jay K Joshi
    March 8, 2023

    Survey Resutls

    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    October 16, 2022
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Support Us
  • Shop DME
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcasts
    A conversation with Kristen Ogden, patient advocate for Dr. David Bockoff

    A conversation with Kristen Ogden, patient advocate for Dr. David Bockoff

    March 19, 2023
    Analyzing opioid prescribing trends with Mr. Jacob James Rich

    Analyzing opioid prescribing trends with Mr. Jacob James Rich

    March 19, 2023
    A conversation with Dr. John Whyte, author of Take Control of Your Heart Disease Risk

    A conversation with Dr. John Whyte, author of Take Control of Your Heart Disease Risk

    March 19, 2023
    We catch up with Dr. Linda Cheek to glean her thoughts on the DEA's continuing encroachment into healthcare in a post-Ruan world.

    Catching up with Dr. Linda Cheek, founder of Doctors of Courage

    March 19, 2023
    A conversation with Dr. Radhika Sharma, physician influencer and life coach

    A conversation with Dr. Radhika Sharma, physician influencer and life coach

    February 18, 2023
    A conversation with Dr. Alin Gragossian, physician and heart transplant survivor

    A conversation with Dr. Alin Gragossian, physician and heart transplant survivor

    February 13, 2023
  • Surveys

    Surveys

    Does inflation affect your spending

    Does inflation affect how you use your deductible?

    by Jay K Joshi
    March 8, 2023

    Survey Resutls

    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    How strongly do you believe that you can tell when your provider does not trust you?

    October 16, 2022
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Support Us
  • Shop DME
No Result
View All Result
Daily Remedy
No Result
View All Result
Home Contrarian

Irony of Abortion Law

Making a clinical behavior more difficult to accomplish does not deter it, but instead, makes it riskier.

Jay K Joshi by Jay K Joshi
February 18, 2023
in Contrarian
1
Irony in Abortion Law

Jackson Simmer

Healthcare is by nature a service to patients, and healthcare laws must balance social responsibility with individual service. Yet most healthcare laws avoid the issue of balance altogether and are fundamentally restrictive. Restricting one specific behavior within a spectrum of complex healthcare behaviors creates unintended consequences that vary depending on the individual and on the interpretation of the law. Abortion, for example, is at times a scientific issue, at others a religious one, but mostly seen as a poorly constructed balance of both. Different conceptual combinations produce different interpretations of abortion laws. Should these laws focus on defining inappropriate sexual behaviors, or on the sanctity of human life, or on some combination?

Most abortion laws default to restricting access. Making a clinical behavior more difficult to accomplish does not deter it, but instead makes it riskier. The overall number of abortions does not decrease, simply the locations where abortions are performed switch from one state to another. State-by-state analyses of abortion rates and varying levels of restrictions show that when one state increases restrictions on abortions, abortion rates increase in neighboring states. Women seeking abortions travel farther for medical care as necessary, which is proven to be less safe for patients. A single restriction does not alter all decisions or actions that prompt a patient to consider abortion. Rather, it makes those decisions and actions more burdensome. In legal terms, it places an undue burden.

Modern abortion laws attempt to militate against these burdens by attempting to target restrictions more clinically. These laws, called TRAP laws, or targeted restriction on abortion providers, target clinicians or patients by restricting specific clinical behaviors that take place during an abortion procedure. The belief is that addressing a specific clinical behavior will affect the overall intent to seek an abortion. But the more restrictive the law, the greater the array of unintended consequences.

In Kentucky, abortion providers must perform a narrated ultrasound for patients considering abortions. The provider describes the fetal heart rate while showing pictures of the ultrasound to the patient. This is now a legally mandated part of obtaining informed consent for abortions in the state. Opponents of the law describe it as unconstitutional, accusing the law of targeting women in their most vulnerable moments and exploiting them in moments of heightened vulnerability to deter a potential abortion.

Henry David Thoreau described individuals as “independent entities with rights,” a sentiment codified in modern medical ethics, which define a patient as an autonomous individual who has control over his or her body. This implies an individual’s informed consent in essential terms, a concept to be viewed in its entirety: either you fully consent, or you do not. But mandating a provision, a specific act of narrating the ultrasound, introduces an elemental framework, which means a specific act must be part of informed consent, and that changes its definition. This alters the decision to sign consent for an abortion into a willingness to tolerate the specific act of participating in a narrated ultrasound, an element that may unduly influence the patient who otherwise would have consented.

Another contested TRAP law out of Louisiana is similarly restrictive and produces similar unintended clinical effects. The law requires abortion providers to have hospital admitting privileges when performing abortions in the state, ostensibly to promote continuity of care should a complication arise. But when applied, the law reduces the number of abortion providers in the state to single digits. Proponents of the law advocate for continuity of care, an important concern for any outpatient procedure. Opponents believe the risk of potential complications from a certain number of abortion procedures does not justify a blanket restriction on all abortions.

In healthcare, the distribution of burdens when implementing a law should account for actual risks and perceived risks, balancing clinical burdens with clinical risks. The Supreme Court upheld this perspective when it ruled Louisiana abortion restrictions were unlawful and that abortion providers do not require hospital admitting privileges. The complexity of healthcare creates a burden for patients that most laws seek to simplify or avoid. This tendency only produces additional burdens on vulnerable patients as each attempt to address the burden through law merely recontextualizes it to other aspects of clinical behavior.

This problem is inherent to healthcare. It affects everything from polarizing health issues to ownership of medical data. If we believe patients should have access to data to make their own decisions, then we need to explain the data. But that requires having someone explain the data objectively. And in explaining the data objectively, we need to ensure patients understand the data sufficiently enough to make decisions that account for burdens and risks. On it goes, often with the full extent of clinical consequences not manifesting until much later.

ShareTweet
Jay K Joshi

Jay K Joshi

Dr. Jay K Joshi serves as the editor-in-chief of Daily Remedy. He is a serial entrepreneur and sought after thought-leader for matters related to healthcare innovation and medical jurisprudence. He has published articles on a variety of healthcare topics in both peer-reviewed journals and trade publications. His legal writings include amicus curiae briefs prepared for prominent federal healthcare cases.

Comments 1

  1. Anne Welsbacher says:
    1 month ago

    Hi. Just discovered your site and am perusing it. In your “About Us” section, you state that the references you use will be posted at the ends of the articles. I have not seen any such references citing, although I am still new to this publication. Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you consider articles? I did note that one long piece from 2020 by a legal expert cited references throughout the article, but did not see references in a couple of your much shorter articles that I read – this one, and one about unintended discrimination. These are both opinion pieces – perhaps that is why you didn’t cite refs? Just curious. Also, I wonder which writers, if any, are freelance contributors and which are regular and/or staff writers. Thanks in advance.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Videos

YouTube Video VVUxUDVQenU5RTFjUVFKNDY2ZlBmdFB3LlRycG1TYWRHYVhB We speak with Mr. Jacob James Rich, who wrote an article in Reason Magazine - The Fight To Criminalize Opioid Prescribing - which provides a synopsis of his seminal work published in the Yale Law & Policy Review Inter Alia.

We discuss the article in depth, gleaning important insights on how opioid data is mischaracterized to arrive at contrived narratives of physician over-prescribing.

Mr. Jacob James Rich is a researcher at the Cleveland Clinic Center for Value-Based Care Research, a Ph.D. student at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, and a policy analyst at Reason Foundation.

https://reason.com/2023/02/10/the-fight-to-criminalize-opioid-prescribing/

https://ylpr.yale.edu/inter_alia/misinformed-misguided-prescription-abuse-prevention-act-response-delfino

#opioid #epidemic #data #fallacy
Load More... Subscribe

Expert vs. Lay Testimony

Visuals

NADAC (National Average Drug Acquisition Cost)

NADAC (National Average Drug Acquisition Cost)

by Jay K Joshi
January 29, 2023
0

We list the acquisition price of drugs that are covered under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program - effectively, how much does the government pay for common drugs utilized by patients on Medicaid. Drugs listed are from A-CH.  

Read more

Twitter Updates

Tweets by DailyRemedy1

Newsletter

Start your Daily Remedy journey

Cultivate your knowledge of current healthcare events and ensure you receive the most accurate, insightful healthcare news and editorials.

*we hate spam as much as you do

Popular

  • Media Sensationalism in the Opioid Epidemic

    Media Sensationalism in the Opioid Epidemic

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • My Plight as an Abandoned Pain Patient

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • In Support of IL HB 2046

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Thank you, AHCJ!

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Narratives on the Opioid Crisis

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0

Daily Remedy

Daily Remedy offers the best in healthcare information and healthcare editorial content. We take pride in consistently delivering only the highest quality of insight and analysis to ensure our audience is well-informed about current healthcare topics - beyond the traditional headlines.

Daily Remedy website services, content, and products are for informational purposes only. We do not provide medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. All rights reserved.

Important Links

  • Support Us
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions

Newsletter

Start your Daily Remedy journey

Cultivate your knowledge of current healthcare events and ensure you receive the most accurate, insightful healthcare news and editorials.

*we hate spam as much as you do

  • Survey
  • Podcast
  • About Us
  • Contact us

© 2023 Daily Remedy

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Podcasts
  • Surveys
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Support Us
  • Shop DME

© 2023 Daily Remedy

Start your Daily Remedy journey

Cultivate your knowledge of current healthcare events and ensure you receive the most accurate, insightful healthcare news and editorials.

*we hate spam as much as you do