Georgetown University Law Center

About: Georgetown University Law Center is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Supreme court & Global health. The organization has 585 authors who have published 2488 publications receiving 36650 citations. The organization is also known as: Georgetown Law & GULC.

Mitigating pandemic influenza: the ethics of implementing a school closure policy

Abstract: Pandemic influenza response plans have placed a significant emphasis on school closures as a community mitigation strategy. However, school closures raise serious ethical concerns, many of which have been largely overlooked. First, evidence of this intervention's efficacy has not yet been firmly established, calling into question whether it will be useful against the threat. Second, school closures have the potential to create serious adverse consequences, which will disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. Thus, policy makers should focus on gathering more evidence about the efficacy of school closures and on strengthening communication and transparency about the strengths and weaknesses of any school-closure plan that they decide to adopt. Policy makers should also consider intermediate options, such as partial school closures, which might provide ways to reap many of the benefits of school closings, while minimizing the costs. Finally, policy makers must labor to ensure that the benefits and the burdens of any interventions are distributed equitably.

Why Soft Law Dominates International Finance—and not Trade

Abstract: International financial law is in many ways a peculiar instrument of global economic affairs. Unlike international trade and monetary affairs, where global coordination is directed through formal international organizations, international financial law arises through inter-agency institutions with ambiguous legal status. Furthermore, the commitments made by regulatory officials participating in such forums are non-binding. This divergence is perplexing, especially when comparing international financial law to international trade. Both trade and finance comprise key areas of 'international economic law' and their rules have important distributive consequences for global markets and market participants. This article suggests that in order to understand soft law's value as a coordinating mechanism, an institutional assessment of the way that law is enforced is necessary. Under close inspection, international financial law departs from traditional public international law notions of informality and can in fact be 'harder' than its soft-law quality suggests. This feature helps explain why international financial rules, though technically non-binding, are often relied upon. The predominance of international soft law in finance does not, however, imply that it is without flaws, and this article highlights important structural deficiencies that the World Trade Organization, a more mature legal regime, largely avoids. Oxford University Press 2010, all rights reserved, Oxford University Press.

Health information privacy and public health.

Abstract: Protecting the privacy of individually-identifiable health data and promoting the public’s health often seem at odds. Privacy advocates consistently seek to limit the acquisition, use, and disclosure of identifiable health information in governmental and private sector settings. Their concerns relate to misuses or wrongful disclosures of sensitive health data that can lead to discrimination and stigmatization against individuals. Public health practitioners, on the other hand, seek regular, ongoing access to and use of identifiable health information to accomplish important public health objectives. The collection and use of identifiable health data by federal, tribal, state, and local health authorities support nearly all public health functions and goals. Identifiable health data are the lifeblood of public health practice. When aggregated, these data help authorities monitor the incidence, patterns, and trends of injury and disease in populations. Health data are acquired by public health authorities through testing, screening, and treatment programs.

The Equitable Distribution of COVID-19 Therapeutics and Vaccines

Abstract: Scientists from across the globe are racing to develop effective vaccines and therapeutics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Plans are beginning to emerge for ensuring the equitable worldwide distribution of vaccines and therapeutics resulting from biomedical innovations. Absent broad agreement and buy-in on those plans, governments may prioritize their own populations, resulting in inequitable distribution of medical products both within and among countries. During the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, wealthy nations bought virtually all vaccine supplies. Even after the WHO appealed for donations, supplies for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were limited. The White House may have already sought exclusive access to a COVID-19 vaccine candidate. European and Asian countries have imposed export controls on personal protective equipment and ventilators, with similar export controls likely to extend to COVID-19 vaccine and therapeutic stocks. The development and widespread distribution of COVID-19 medical treatments are a common global interest. Here we offer a proposal for global cooperation to ensure equitable distribution of vaccines and therapies for COViD-19.