| Health Law Essay | Health Law A Regulated Enterprise | Introduction to Health Law and PolicyProfessor Voss | By Kimberly Causey | 1/11/2015 | Health Law A Regulated Enterprise The great Statesman Sir Winston Churchhill clearly stated, “If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the Law”. When Law Regulators at all tiers interpret various components of the law, the interpretation can convey an unruly mixture of complexities. Likewise, Health Law can be encountered in various aspects on both the State and Federal levels. Thus creating a mixture of regulations by all levels of government. For example, the obvious is the overlapping of police power between the state laws and the preemptive decisions made by which the federal law prevails. Overall, applicable laws have continuously exemplified complexity, specifically in Health Law. Yet, Regulators continue to redefine the laws that are created both on State and Federal levels. For this purpose, I will identify present a mixture of fundamental differences that are encountered at any tier level. Regulations can frequently change in producing guidance about compliance of expected outcomes. What is reasonable and practical at times can produce countless interactions and inconsistency among regulators. For instance, Hall and Showalter both mention their concerns for quality, autonomy, access and cost which will be discussed. Hall presents a great article on “What is Health Law?” He further concludes on what is described as “Health Care Law” which includes environmental and public health issues. Yet, each law maker has their own set of legal answers that determine an outcome, and still these answers result in different regulations of written policies. Hall further states, “ For the public policy community, health care law consist of the legal drivers of the main policy concerns in health care financing which are cost, quality, and access. All together, each generates a different answer to physicians, philosophers, or facility administrators”. Cost, quality, autonomy and access are an arguable concern for regulators. Laws have been implemented for protective measures. Showalter talks about various compliance laws. For example, utilization review in healthcare often helps to determine if there are acts of fraud, abuse, waste, and false claims. Another example of this type of compliance law is the False Claims Act in which Showalter discusses in his book. “The False Claims Act was enacted to prevent fraud against the Federal Government. Congress enacted the Federal False Claims act during the civil war. Additionally, it has been referred to as “Lincoln’s Law”. Since 1986, amendments have been enacted into law. This has made this act the most effective tool in combating waste, fraud and abuse in federal spending. In addition, administrative changes are needed to meet the demands of the quality and access to health care in the public sector. Another example is the Anti-Kick Back Statue enacted in 1972 to protect patients and federal health programs from fraud and abuse. Interestingly, from this enactment came a continuum of many sectors, The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), The Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) to name a few. These enactments all produced regulations governed by laws, but without the presence of these enactments, access, quality, and cost factors would not have been as regulated as they are now. Lastly, this certainly does not mean it is easy to manage, it simply means there are rules in place to follow between the continuity of laws of government at all tier levels. Another level of concern in law is Autonomy. It is even more compelling with its laws and understanding. As simple as this may sound, according to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Autonomy is defined or suggested as an idea that is generally understood to refer to the capacity to be one's own person, to live one's life according to reasons and motives that are taken as one's own and not the product of manipulative or distorting external forces. Contrarily, the Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) article presented something different with the small pox vaccination concerns in which the gentlemen refused a smallpox vaccination. Nonetheless, the law protected the public community against the immunity of the disease, but yet it refused to acknowledge Jacobson’s rights and concerns. Accordingly, one has the right to decide what works best for their life, but the law can at time present a contradiction of its own laws. Promulgated executive decisions that are contrary to one’s own decision appear to be useless. Or is it useless if it only disregards one individual’s interest and not that of a majority? Needless to say, there are many answers and concerns with inconsistencies within the law system. Showwalter notes that, “The U.S. Medical system is perhaps the most heavily regulated enterprise in the world”. No doubt, one can see why there are so many inconsistencies between the tier levels. It appears, no one person has a correct answer, but someone always has an answer to define the law. In summary, Regulators at all tiers redefine the health laws that are created continuously to protect the public interest whether through cost, quality, access or autonomy. It is obvious there is a mixture of State and Federal laws that overlap and produce different complexities and concerns from state to state. However, the Federal Law always preempts any state law for any matter. Arguably and overall, applicable laws have been implemented to protect the public interest and even with its variations of complexities each is encountered with a different aspect of concern. The interactions and inconsistencies amongst tiers have created a constant debate over the laws. Lastly, the great Statesman Sir Winston Churchhill couldn’t have made a better observation when he clearly stated, “If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect.Citations 1. Havardi, J. (2009). The greatest Briton essays on Winston Churchill's life and political philosophy. London: Shepheard-Walwyn. 2. Jacobson V. Massachusetts 197 U.S. 11 (1905). (n.d.). Retrieved January 11, 2015, from http://www.justia.com 3. Hall, M. (2006). Health Law. Health law. Winston-Salem, N.C.: Wake Forest Law Review Association. 4. Wolper, L. (2011). Health care administration: Managing organized delivery systems (5th ed.). Sudbury, Mass.: Jones and Bartlett. 5. Health Law Resources. (n.d.). Retrieved January 11, 2015, from https://www.healthlawyers.org/hlresources/Health Law Wiki/Anti-Kickback Statute.aspx 6. Showalter, J. Stuart (n.d.). FRAUD, ABUSE, AND CORPORATE COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS. In The Law of Healthcare Administration (5th ed.). Chicago. 7. Zalta, E. (n.d.). Autonomy. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, Calif.: Metaphysics Research Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University. | |