As bioethics gains more prominence in public policy debates, it is time to more fully reflect on the following: what is its role in the public square, and what limitations relate to and barriers impede its fulfilment of this role? I contend we should consider the how of bioethics (as a policy influencer) rather than simply focus on the who or what of bioethical enquiry. This is not to suggest considerations of latter categories are not important, only that too little (...) attention has been paid to parallel or resulting policy involvement—involvement that will require specialised skills and knowledge that we can develop with a proactive (vs reactive) stance. Moreover, and equally critically, this how of public policy involvement will require more transparency regarding influences (eg, philosophical, ideological, cultural, socio-political) on what bioethicists bring to the table and what constituency base each represents—a humility as to the scope of one's role. In this vision, bioethics is not one single person or belief system for a policymaker to call to guide or give support to a position; rather, it offers tools—formed and utilised by a diverse disciplinary range of individuals—to help guide ethical analysis of biomedical endeavours, with the goal of infusion and diffusion of ethical enquiry and prioritisation in health policymaking, and greater humility among bioethicists who inform this discussion. (shrink)

Medical-legal partnerships (MLPs) — collaborative endeavors between health care clinicians and lawyers to more effectively address issues impacting health care — have proliferated over the past decade. The goal of this interdisciplinary approach is to improve the health outcomes and quality of life of patients and families, recognizing the many non-medical influences on health care and thus the value of an interdisciplinary team to enhance health. This article examines the unique, interrelated ethical issues that confront the clinical and legal partners (...) involved in MLPs. We contend that the ethical precepts of the clinical and legal professions should be seen as opportunities, not barriers, to further the interdisciplinary nature of MLPs. The commonalities in ethical approaches represent a potential bridge between legal and health care advocacy for patient/client well-being. Bioethics has a role to play in building and analyzing this bridge: bioethics may serve as a discourse and method to enhance collaboration by highlighting common ethical foundations and refocusing legal and clinical partners on their similar goals of service for patients/clients. This article explores this bridging role of bioethics, through a series of case studies. It concludes with recommendations to strengthen the collaborations. (shrink)

Medical-legal partnerships — collaborative endeavors between health care clinicians and lawyers to more effectively address issues impacting health care — have proliferated over the past decade. The goal of this interdisciplinary approach is to improve the health outcomes and quality of life of patients and families, recognizing the many non-medical influences on health care and thus the value of an interdisciplinary team to enhance health. There are currently over 180 MLPs at over 200 hospitals and health centers in the United (...) States, with increasing federal interest and potential legislative support of this model.This article examines the unique, interrelated, and often similar ethical issues that confront the clinical and legal partners involved in MLPs. We contend that the ethical precepts of the clinical and legal professions should be seen as opportunities, not barriers, to further the interdisciplinary nature of MLPs. (shrink)

Law is now routinely included in the medical school curriculum, often incorporated into bioethics and/or practice of medicine coursework. There seems to lack, however, a systematic understanding of what works in terms of getting across an effective depth and breadth of legal knowledge for medical students — or what such would even look like. Moreover, and more critically, while some literature addresses these what, when, how, and who questions, a more fundamental question is left unanswered: why teach law in medical (...) school? This article suggests a process to reveal a more consensual understanding of this latter question. The author highlights findings and recommendations of some of the leading literature to date related to teaching law in medical schools, and also recent U.K. projects addressing legal teaching in medical schools. Reflecting on these materials and activities, the author suggests that we take a “pause” before we argue for more or different legal topics within the medical curriculum. Before we alter the curricula for more and/or different “law,” first, it is critical to have a meaningful, stakeholder-driven, consensus-seeking discussion of the goals of legal education: why do we think it matters that medical students learn about “the law”? (shrink)

[T]each the law to empower physicians individually and collectively to use the law and law colleagues to serve patients and promote public welfare; in short to better foster the goals of the medical profession.And yet:[A]ntipathy appears to be deeper and more pervasive than ever before, making it hard to imagine that relations between attorneys and physicians can get much worse.It has long been recognized that an understanding of at least some core legal rules and concepts is an important piece of (...) medical training. To address this, law is now typically part of the core medical school curriculum, often incorporated into bioethics and/or practice of medicine coursework — whether as part of a distinct course or series of courses or threaded through the curriculum. While often this education focuses on rules, some have recommended that it also include fundamentals of legal reasoning, and go beyond knowledge to include skills, attitudes, and behaviors vis-à-vis the law. (shrink)

This article describes implementation of a longitudinal curriculum in public health law, building on doctrinal coursework with skills-based coursework and opportunities for interdisciplinary, community-based engagement and service learning. It specifically describes development of a Policy Practicum, giving an example of how law students can learn policy skills and skills of effective community coalition work through a healthy homes partnership, highlighting areas where the curriculum can incorporate interdisciplinary education. It offers lessons learned during the curriculum-building process, and concludes with a more (...) intensive service-learning strategy through the development of a Policy Lab. (shrink)