Congress granted qualified immunity from liability for peer review participation to physicians, osteopaths and dentists, created a national practitioner data bank to track inept, incompetent or unprofessional physicians, and enacted procedural rules for due process, privilege restrictions, and reporting and disbursement of information. The Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 is now in full force, and peer review participants are anxious to cloak themselves with immunity from actions brought by health care professionals. Although its goals are worthy, HCQIA's effects remain to be seen. Serious loopholes appear to exist, warranting close monitoring and possibly early amendment of the Act. Cautious judicial assessment is needed, in order to prevent not only circumvention of the Act's requirements by artful litigants, but also use of the national data bank by health care entities as a pretext for denying privileges and escaping antitrust liability.

This article describes an assessment role performed by clinical psychologists in the employment context, and examines how it has been evaluated by the courts from the standpoint of discrimination against persons with disabilities. Guidelines are offered for making fitness-for-duty decisions which are legally defensible, and examples of the decision-making process are provided. Data-based limitations on professional expertise are articulated, and conclusions drawn are aimed at practicing psychologists and the courts dealing with these uncertainties. Issues are analyzed principally in relation to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which has been passed by both houses of Congress.

It has been nearly a decade since the first cases of AIDS were reported by the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC). During that time there have been over 200 statutes enacted in every jurisdiction in the country. Unfortunately, the content of the legislation is highly diverse, even inconsistent, from state to state, and there is very little guiding federal legislation or regulation. The profound social, moral and public policy dilemmas that are magnified by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) epidemic are still no closer to resolution. Should testing for HIV infection be voluntary, routine or compulsory when there is a higher risk of transmission of HIV? Should America return to traditional moral values of abstinence outside of marriage and zero tolerance of drug use, or should we teach safe sex and use of sterile injection equipment? Should health care professionals maintain strict confidentiality or do they have a duty to protect third parties in imminent danger?

The techniques used to distribute medical products are designed to maximize the manufacturers’ profits by charging a relatively low price to hospitals and a relatively high price to other purchasers, such as doctors and nursing homes. This pricing scheme raises complex antitrust problems, including vertical price fixing between the manufacturer and its distributors, price discrimination by the manufacturer, and agreements between the manufacturer and the hospitals restricting the hospitals’ ability to resell. This Article examines these antitrust issues.

In response to the public outcry for mandatory testing for AIDS, this Article explores the major issues concerning the identification of persons with AIDS in society. The Article first studies testing procedures and the purposes behind them to determine if a call for mandatory testing of the general populace would better achieve society's objectives for identifying individuals with AIDS. Concluding that testing should not be required of the population as a whole, the Article then explores whether testing should be required of certain subpopulations which society perceives as likely to have or to spread the disease. In this context, too, the Article concludes that mandatory testing would be unwarranted, and that funds proposed for mandatory testing would be put to better use in education and universal precautions to prevent the further spread of AIDS.

Tax exemption is an ancient, honorable and expensive tradition. Tax exemption for hospitals is all of these three, but it also places in sharp focus a fundamental problem with tax exemption in general. Organizations can retain their tax exemption while changing circumstances or expectations undermine the rationale that led to the exemption in the first place. Hospitals are perhaps the best example of this problem. The dramatic changes in the health care environment have eliminated most of the characteristics of a hospital that originally persuaded the citizenry to grant it an exemption. Hospitals have entered into competition with tax-paying businesses, and have increasingly behaved like competitive actors. Such conduct may well be beneficial, but it does not follow that tax exemption is appropriate. Rather than an undifferentiated subsidy, a shift to focused goals will provide charitable hospitals with the opportunity and incentive to “do the right thing.”

Medical technology is easing the plight of many infertile couples by offering such reproductive alternatives as in vitro fertilization, artificial insemination and surrogacy. In response to the changes in our society's definition of family, wrought by scientific advances, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform States Laws promulgated the Uniform Status of Children of Assisted Conception Act. The purpose of this Act is to protect the interests of children born through extraordinary medical procedures. This Note analyzes the Act's provisions regarding surrogacy and focuses on how the Commission's regulatory scheme fails to protect the child's interests. The Act's alternative of voiding the surrogacy contract also does not protect the child's interests. A more complete regulatory scheme which protects the adult parties’ interests, as well as the child's, should be devised, as the adequacy of the adult parties’ protection ultimately affects the child's well-being.

Genetic identification tests — better known as DNA profiling — currently allow criminal investigators to connect suspects to physical samples retrieved from a victim or the scene of a crime. A controversial yet acclaimed expansion of DNA analysis is the creation of a massive databank of genetic codes. This Note explores the privacy concerns arising out of the collection and retention of extremely personal information in a central database. The potential for unauthorized access by those not investigating a particular crime compels the implementation of national standards and stringent security measures.

This article reviews legislative options to prevent the transmission of HIV infection. It distinguishes between pre-exposure measures designed to prevent intitial exposure, and post-exposure measures aimed at preventing infected individuals from exposing others. Part I identifies education as the key component of a comprehensive prevention program, and reviews options for pre-exposure education programs designed to avoid or minimize exposure. Part II reviews post-exposure prevention measures, focusing on reporting and contact tracing provisions. Mandatory reporting by name of individuals testing HIV positive and mandatory contact tracing are opposed as counterproductive prevention measures; voluntary partner notification is supported. Part III examines various prevention efforts for settings where there may be either a real or perceived risk of transmission of HIV infection. Part IV sets out conclusions.

Over the last twenty years, state legislatures have enacted statutes incorporating medically and legally established criteria to be utilized in the determination of death. Similarly consistent criteria for determining the onset of life have yet to be established. As a result, unacceptably conflicting statutory language defining life and the state's interest in that life exists. This conflict can be resolved by a functional approach that consistently applies criteria used to define the end of life to the beginning of life.

Environmental pollution threatens public health. The search for solutions has advanced the frontiers of science and law. Efforts to protect the environment and public health begin with describing potential adverse consequences of human activities and characterizing the predicted risk. The National Environmental Policy Act requires the preparation of environmental impact statements to describe the effects of proposed federal projects and provide information for agency decisionmakers and the public.

Risks to public health are particularly difficult to quantify because of uncertainty about the relation between exposure to environmental contamination and disease. Risk assessment is the current scientific tool to present estimates of risk. The methodology has created controversy, however, when underlying assumptions and uncertainties are not clearly presented. Critics caution that the methodology is vulnerable to bias. This Note evaluates the use of risk assessment in the environmental impact statement process and offers recommendations to ensure informed decisions.

Promises of confidentiality of HIV-related medical records and protection from discrimination based on HIV seropositivity are two of the legislative inducements state governments have offered to encourage voluntary HIV testing. Yet neither can be granted without impact on others whose interests range from those of a lover to those of an insurer. Politics as well as practicalities prevent the absolute protection of records from unauthorized disclosure and of individuals from discrimination. This article details the already enacted statutory compromises that have been made to resolve the conflicts of these competing interests and closely examines the myriad fine decisions made in reaching those legislative decisions.

Financing health care for perons with HIV infection is an increasing burden on states and their taxpayers. The major problems of state policy in the 1990s are how to organize and finance both early detection of infection and preventive drug treatment for persons without symptoms and how to provide a full range of health and social services for infected persons whose life expectancy is unknown. This article first describes the shift in the perceptions of HIV infection from a plague to a chronic disease and the implications of this shift for state government. Then it places the history of financing for health care in the context of general health care financing policy during the past decade. Next it describes the history of state action to finance care for HIV infection, especially the use of of Medicaid Waivers, problems of state financing for expensive prescription drugs, and state initiatives, especially in California, Michigan, New Jersey and New York. Finally, the article presents seven policy questions that states should consider in deciding what, if any, legislation or regulations to enact in order to organize treatment and pay some or all of the costs of care for persons with HIV infection.

Persons afflicted with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) or its preceding medical conditions face a potential problem with assured access to basic threshold medical care. Subject to certain limitations, there is no guarantee that a physician will fulfill the health care needs of any population of patients. Individuals with AIDS, thus, have a considerable interest in the development of a duty on behalf of physicians to provide treatment. This Note first highlights the limits of the legal duty to treat. It then examines the theoretical impetus propelling an ethical duty to treat. The Note concludes that the grounds for imposing an ethical duty on physicians are too weak to support that result, but the creation of an AIDS-specific legal duty is a viable alternative.