Feminist Judgments: Health Law Rewritten

by Seema Mohapatra (Editor), Lindsay Wiley (Editor)

Overview

This volume provides an alternate history of health law by rewriting key judicial opinions from a feminist perspective. Each chapter includes a rewritten opinion penned by a leading scholar relying exclusively on court precedents and scientific understanding available at the time of the original decision accompanied by commentary from an expert placing the case in historical context and explaining how the feminist judgment might have shaped a different path for subsequent developments. It provides a map of the health law field-where paternalism, individualism, gender stereotypes, and tensions over the public-private divide shape decisions about informed consent, medical and nursing malpractice, the relationships among health care professionals and the institutions where they work, end-of-life care, reproductive health care, biomedical research, ownership of human tissues and cells, the influence of religious directives on health care standards, health care discrimination, long-term care, private health insurance, Medicaid coverage, the Affordable Care Act, and more.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781108495097
Publisher:	Cambridge University Press
Publication date:	12/22/2022
Series:	Feminist Judgment Series: Rewritten Judicial Opinions
Pages:	400
Product dimensions:	5.98(w) x 9.02(h) x 0.98(d)

About the Author

Seema Mohapatra, JD, MPH, is the M.D. Anderson Foundation Endowed Professor in Health Law and Professor of Law at SMU Dedman School of Law. Her research focuses on biosciences and the law, assisted reproduction and surrogacy, international family and health law, health equity, and informed consent. She is the coauthor of Reproductive Technologies and the Law (2021).

Lindsay F. Wiley, JD, MPH, is Professor of Law and Director of the Health Law and Policy Program at UCLA School of Law. Her research focuses on public health law and ethics and access to health care. She is the coauthor of Public Health Law: Power, Duty, Restraint (2016) and Public Health Law and Ethics:A Reader (2018).

Table of Contents

1. Introduction Seema Mohapatra and Lindsay F. Wiley; 2. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospitals, 105 N.E. 92, 93 (N.Y. 1914) Danielle Pelfrey Duryea and Kelly Dineen; 3. Reynolds v. McNichols, 488 F.2d 1378 (10th Cir. 1973) Aziza Ahmed and Wendy Parmet; 4. Conservatorship of Valerie N., 707 P.2d 760 (Cal. 1985) Cynthia Soohoo, Sofia Yakren and Doriane Lambelet Coleman; 5. Bouvia v. Superior Court, 225 Cal. Rptr. 297 (Cal Ct. App. 1986) Joan H. Krause and Barry Furrow; 6. Moore v. Regents of University of California, 793 P.2d 479 (Cal. 1990) Jessica Roberts and Lisa C. Ikemoto; 7. Linton v. Commissioner of Health and Environment, 65 F.3d 508 (6th Cir. 1995) Ruqaiijah Yearby and Gwendolyn Roberts Majette; 8. Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999) Doron Dorfman and Becka Rich; 9. Doe v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co., 179 F.3d 557 (7th Cir. 1999) Christina S. Ho and Valarie Blake; 10. Smith v. Rasmussen, 249 F.3d 755 (8th Cir. 2001) Heather Walter McCabe and Craig Konnoth; 11. Burton v. State, 49 So.3d 263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010) Greer Donley and Nadia Sawicki; 12. National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. 519 (2012) Mary Ann Chirba, Alice A. Noble and Elizabeth Weeks; 13. Means v. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 836 F.3d 643 (6th Cir. 2016) Maya Manian and Leslie C. Griffin; 14. Does v. Gillespie, 867 F. 3d 1034 (8th Cir. 2017) Elizabeth Kukura, Jennifer Oliva and Melissa Alexander; 15. National Institute of Family & Life Advocates v. Becerra, 138 S.Ct. 2361 (2018) Brietta R. Clark and Sonia Suter.