Law Commons^™

The Conscience Defense To Malpractice, Nadia N. Sawicki

Faculty Publications & Other Works

This Article presents the first empirical study of state conscience laws that establish explicit procedural protections for medical providers who refuse to participate in providing reproductive health services, including abortion, sterilization, contraception, and emergency contraception.

Scholarship and public debate about law's role in protecting health care providers' conscience rights typically focus on who should be protected, what actions should be protected, and whether there should be any limitations on the exercise of conscience rights. This study, conducted in accordance with best methodological practices from the social sciences for policy surveillance and legal mapping, is the first to provide concrete data …

Causation In Hepatitis B. Vaccination Litigation In France: Breaking Through Scientific Uncertainty?, Jean-Sebastien Borghetti

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Vaccination against hepatitis B has been available since 1982 and is strongly recommended by most health professionals. In France, the hepatitis B vaccine is very widespread, but it has come under suspicion that it can cause demyelinating diseases such as multiple sclerosis. Several epidemiological studies have been carried out to discover if there is indeed a connection between the hepatitis B vaccination and demyelinating diseases, but no such connection has been established so far. Many cases have nevertheless been brought before French courts, in which plaintiffs argue that they have developed a demyelinating disease due to the hepatitis B vaccination, …

Operation Rescue Blockades And The Misuse Of 42 U.S.C. 1985(3), Michael F. O'Brien

Cleveland State Law Review

The purpose of this Note is to demonstrate that § 1985(3) is not applicable to Operation Rescue's blockade activities. Part II provides a brief survey of the history of § 1985(3) from its roots in the post-Civil War era to the 1950's. Part III examines the requirements for a § 1985(3) claim as delineated in the Griffin, Novotny, and Scott decisions. Part IV applies these requirements to the blockade controversy and argues that: (1) Gender-based animus should be accepted by the Court as a form of class-based animus within the meaning of § 1985(3); (2) the blockades do not fall …