“This ruling allows health systems like ours to continue making positive reforms to the country’s health care system that was on an unsustainable track prior to the passage of the Act,” says Schlichting, who heads one of the largest integrated health care systems in the United States.
Comments on Supreme Court ruling related to nursing.
How might the Supreme Court decision affect the need for nurses? What are likely repercussions for patients? What are the potential effects of the Supreme Court’s decision on vulnerable populations, such as the elderly?
Leaders from Geisinger Health System will respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Available for interviews are Thomas Graf, M.D., Associate Chief Medical Officer for Population Health and Chairman of the Community Practice Service line for Geisinger Health System Associate; and Duane Davis, M.D., Chief Executive Officer, Geisinger Health Plan. Reporters should gather at the Main Entrance of GMC to be escorted to the appropriate conference room. Or, reporters can dial in to a conference call using the following information: Dial-in number: 570-214-9980 Passcode: 567432#
The following experts in federal healthcare law are available to speak with the media in advance of, and following the United States Supreme Court decision on healthcare, which is expected to be announced on Thursday, June 28, 2012.
The American Sociological Association (ASA) has sociologists available to discuss the Supreme Court’s forthcoming ruling on the constitutionality of the health care reform law.
A list and description of faculty members of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics who will be available to comment on the Supreme Court's decision on the Affordable Care Act, including ethical, legal and social viewpoints.
New national poll shows women favor mandate more than men.
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule as early as today on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. The decision on President Obama's signature legislative accomplishment comes a little more than four months before the November election. This tip sheet offers University of Virginia experts who can comment on the issue and the court's ruling from a variety of standpoints.
Sometime next week, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hand down its decision in Florida v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, a legal and political lightning rod that will determine the constitutionality of President Obama’s landmark health reform legislation, and could help decide who will occupy the White House next January. Several Cornell University scholars – in fields ranging from constitutional law and presidential politics to how people make health care choices – are available to speak with members of the media.
[No description]
Even with an imminent Supreme Court ruling on the health care overhaul law, it’s still the primary care physician and the local community that will determine the path of true health care reform. That’s the message from “Communities of Solution: The Folsom Report Revisited,” a policy paper published online in the May/June issue of Annals of Family Medicine.
The ethical principles that have for centuries shaped the relationship between patient and physician should also guide legislators, regulators -- and justices of the highest court -- charged with crafting U.S. health care policies that demarcate the boundaries of a physician's business practice, an Indiana University professor argues. This is all the more pressing with the "creeping commercialization" that now characterizes medicine in the form of physician-owned specialty hospitals, according to an analysis published in the June issue of the American Business Law Journal.
When the U.S. Supreme Court Justices announced their rulings, these professors can provide inside analyses based on their many years of collaboration with the state and federal agencies, and populations potentially impacted.
Indiana U. experts in Constitutional and health law, public health, business ethics and health policy can discuss the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court ruling concerning the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Marcia Boumil of Tufts University School of Medicine examines state laws regulating pharmaceutical gifts to doctors and finds that their constitutionality may be in question in light of a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case from Vermont concerning data mining.
With critical, far-reaching decisions still to be made by the Supreme Court, the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law is offering scholars to reporters seeking informed commentary.
Gregory P. Magarian, JD, professor of law, and Timothy D. McBride, PhD, professor of public health, both at Washington University in St. Louis, are available for expert commentary on the Supreme Court’s Affordable Care Act decision.
Elizabeth Young, associate professor of law and director of the immigration law clinic at the University of Arkansas, is following Supreme Court’s consideration of Arizona’s 2010 immigration law and is available for comment.
Michael Dorf, constitutional law expert, former law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy and professor of law at Cornell University, comments on U.S. Supreme Court deliberations on a constitutional challenge to Arizona immigration law.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care act has prompted some interesting and provocative issues about – and between – the president and the judicial branch, says Gregory P. Magarian, JD, professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis and former clerk for retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. “These alarmed reactions reflect historical ignorance,” he says.
RSS
Medicine keyboard_arrow_right
Sciencekeyboard_arrow_right
Life keyboard_arrow_right
Business keyboard_arrow_right
Journal News keyboard_arrow_right
By Location keyboard_arrow_right
Meetings, Grants, and Events keyboard_arrow_right