Americans are increasingly turning to hospice services to provide them with medical care, pain management, and emotional support at the end of life. The increase in the rates of hospice utilization is explained by a number of factors including a “hospice movement” dating to the 1970s which emphasized hospice as a tool to promote dignity for the terminally ill; coverage of hospice services by Medicare beginning in 1983; and, the market for hospice services provision, sustained almost entirely by governmental reimbursement. (...) On the one hand, the growing acceptance of hospice may be seen as a sign of trends giving substance to the death-with-dignity movement and the growing strength of end-of-life decision-makers and planners who integrate medical, community, family and spiritual networks. On the other hand, the precise relationship between the death-with-dignity and commercial processes driving hospice utilization rates are not well understood. On May 2, 2013, the U.S. Government intervened in a lawsuit brought by former hospice employees alleging that behind Vitas Innovative Hospice Care, the largest for-profit hospice service provider in the United States, lie an intricate web of incentives for patient intake nurses, physicians and marketers which not only drove hospice patients to use more expensive crisis care services, but influenced patient and family decisions as to whether or not to discontinue curative treatment. The corporate, investment, and regulatory history behind Vitas provides an important insight into the market realities behind Americans' embrace of hospice care and the risks to patient autonomy and health that accompany the commercialization of this ethically and morally complex health care service. (shrink)

Hospice care in the United States has undergone a remarkable transformation since it assumed its modern form in the late 1960s. It began as a movement driven by small organizations staffed with many volunteer providers focusing on comprehensive spiritual, palliative, and mental health services for a relatively small number of terminally ill patients, typically suffering from cancer. The idea behind hospice during its early days was that a terminally patient and his or her family made a decision to focus on (...) easing a patient’s pain and anxiety, making him or her more comfortable, rather than pursuing additional curative treatment. Because these objectives required a wide range of professional and non-professional skills, hospice care involved not only physicians and nurses, but clergy, social workers, volunteer caretakers, homemakers, and, of course, family members. The process of decision-making by the patient and his or her family was never uniform and never systematically studied. (shrink)

This article highlights and evaluates the role of CEPI and its contribution to global equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines through its established partnerships for vaccine development. The article adds to the understanding of how and when such partnerships can work for public health, especially under emergency citations.

The COVID-19 Law Lab platform enables quantitative representation of epidemic law and policies in a given country for multiple years, enabling governments and researchers to compare countries, and learn about the impacts and drivers of policy choices. The Law Lab initiative is designed to address the urgent need for quality legal information to support the study of how law and policy can be used to effectively manage this, and future, pandemic(s).

The Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) is a multilateral, multisectoral partnership comprised of more than 70 countries, international organizations, foundations, and businesses to strengthen global health security.