Teaching law in medical schools: first, reflect.

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"?

Her own decision: impairment and authenticity in adolescence.

This case describes an adolescent in a crisis of a chronic medical condition whose situation is complicated by substance abuse and mental illness. D. Micah Hester provides an analytic approach, teasing apart the multiple layers of medical, developmental, and moral issues at hand and describing possible responses and outcomes. Amy T. Campbell examines existing legal guidelines for adolescent decision making, arguing that greater space exists for clinical discretion in these matters than commonly thought. Cheryl D. Lew discusses the development of agency in adolescent patients, the ideal of autonomous decision making in the context of impairment and chronic illness, and the obligation of healthcare teams to examine an adolescent patient's decisions in relation to her identity.

The stigma of "mental" illness: end stage anorexia and treatment refusal.

OBJECTIVE: To answer the questions of whether psychiatric patients should ever be allowed to refuse life-sustaining treatment in favor of comfort care for a condition that is caused by a psychiatric disorder, and if so, under what conditions. METHOD: Case discussion and normative ethical and legal analysis. RESULTS: We argue that psychiatric patients should sometimes be allowed to refuse life-sustaining treatment in favor of comfort care for a condition that is caused by that psychiatric disorder and articulate the core considerations that should be taken into account when such a case arises. DISCUSSION: We also suggest that unwillingness among many, especially mental health professionals, to consider seriously both of these questions risks perpetuating stigmatization of persons with psychiatric disorders, i.e., that the "mentally" ill should not be allowed to make significant decisions for themselves-a-a stigmatization that can result in persons with mental disorders both being prevented from exercising autonomous choice even when they are capable of it, and being denied good comfort care at the end of life--care which would be offered to patients with similarly life-threatening conditions that were not deemed to be the result of "mental" illness.

Law, ethics, and clinical discretion: recurring and emerging issues in adolescent health care.

Varied stakeholders are involved in adolescent health care, with many looking to law to provide clear-cut answers on who can control decisions and when. However, law allows for much clinician discretion, carving out space for contextual sensitivity and clinical determination of maturity. A triad model of decision-making is very often the most appropriate clinical and ethical course. Law's aim is ideally not to impede, but rather to support clinical and ethical wisdom. Drawing on cases in this volume, it is argued that law should not and typically does not, when accurately interpreted and applied, stand in clinicians' way.

How bioethics can enrich medical-legal collaborations.

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.

Therapeutic jurisprudence: A framework for evidence-informed health care policymaking.

Translation of evidence-based practice (EBP) into health care policy is of growing importance, with discussions most often focused on how to fund and otherwise promote EBP through policy (i.e., at system level, beyond the bedside). Less attention has been focused on how to ensure that such policies - as enacted and implemented, and as distinguished from the practices underlying policies - do not themselves cause harm, or at least frustrate accomplishment of "therapeutic" goals of EBP. On a different front, principles of therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) in law have been developed, most prominently in certain areas of law (e.g., mental health and family law), to support more collaborative, less traumatic advocacy and conflict resolution. This paper draws on current applications of TJ and translates such into a therapeutic approach to health care policymaking that moves beyond promotion of EBP in policy. Health care policy itself may be viewed as an intervention that impacts health, positively or not. The goal is to offer a framework for health care policymaking grounded in TJ principles that does not focus on which evidence is "right" for policy use, but rather how we can better understand how consequences of policy, intended or not, affect the well-being of populations. Such framework thus moves policymaking from an either/or debate to a data- and human-driven process. Utilizing TJ framing questions, policies can be developed and evaluated through open dialogue among diverse voices at the table, including - like interventions - the "patients" or, here, targets of such policies. Collectively, they clarify how ends sought - to enhance (or at least not impair) health - can best be achieved through policy when needed, recognizing that as an intervention, there are limits to and boundaries on the usefulness of policy.

Legal and ethical considerations: risks and benefits of postpartum depression screening at well-child visits.

Pediatric professionals are being asked to provide an increasing array of services during well-child visits, including screening for psychosocial and family issues that may directly or indirectly affect their pediatric patients. One such service is routine screening for postpartum depression at pediatric visits. Postpartum depression is an example of a parental condition that can have serious negative effects for the child. Because it is a maternal condition, it raises a host of ethical and legal questions about the boundaries of pediatric care and the pediatric provider's responsibility and liability. In this article we discuss the ethical and legal considerations of, and outline the risks of screening or not screening for, postpartum depression at pediatric visits. We make recommendations for pediatric provider education and for the roles of national professional organizations in guiding the process of defining the boundaries of pediatric care.

Consent, competence, and confidentiality related to psychiatric conditions in adolescent medicine practice.

Health care for adolescents with psychiatric conditions plays out on a complex stage with considerable state variation, based on a mix of statutory and case law. Added to this are less defined factors such as level of trust in community providers, level of cooperation between generalists and specialists, and local regulatory stances toward adolescent health care and mental health care. And, of course, there is the great diversity in diagnosis and maturity level, as well as family cohesion, from patient to patient (and even within a given patient across time). Finally, this situation resides within a larger environment of stigma vis-a-vis mental health care, most notably evident in the United States in disparate insurance coverage of mental versus physical health treatment. With so complex and varied a picture, clinicians should consult with legal counsel to understand applicable state law and local regulatory guidance (if any)and should also seek out ethical consultation when law does not apply or is not decisive, leaving ongoing concerns. And, as with clinical decision-making, in law and ethics "facts matter" [4]. A growing body of law carves out exceptions to general requirements for parental consent, including in mental health care. Ethically informed discussion around capacity determinations, the consent process, and confidentiality can help engage adolescents as "emerging adults"while remaining mindful of risky behavior and "immediate future" orientation that can be hallmarks of adolescence [30]. Respect for the adolescent, parental responsibility toward their child's best interests, and the family unit generally are paramount. Respect--coupled with caution, greater disclosure and cultural sensitivity, and a participatory approach to decision-making that seeks out the least restrictive and coercive options-can help avoid potential legal traps. How best to proceed? It truly depends-with law and ethics the start (not end) of the discussion and analysis.