Category Archives: Public health law
The recently launched Scholars in Residence fellowship program was created to place legal experts in public health agencies across the country—where together they can find new solutions to public health problems. The program, from Network for Public Health Law and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, has chosen six scholars to work with local and state health agencies.
NewPublicHealth spoke with Mary Crossley, Professor of Law and former Dean at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, who will help California health officials identify new ways to address the growing issue of chronic diseases.
NewPublicHealth: Tell me about your career path, and how you came to be interested in public health.
Mary Crossley: I have a career in law teaching and scholarship, but my focus has been—in both my teaching and my scholarship—on health law. Particularly in my scholarship I’m focusing on issues of inequality in healthcare; finance and delivery; and how the law responds to those inequalities—and in many cases fails to respond. So, it’s really been through an interest in thinking about other ways to approach inequity in health and healthcare that I have become more interested in public health and public health law as a mechanism to address it. I also started doing some lecturing and writing that looks at the intersection between the civil rights to inequality in health and a public health approach.
NPH: Did you apply for this or did they come and find you and ask you to take on the position?
Crossley: I applied for it. They put out requests for applications back in the fall, and it was targeted specifically to tenured law professors. And in fact what I learned in talking to the folks involved in the program was that they were particularly interested in getting folks who didn’t necessarily have a long history of involvement in public health, but instead saw this as a way of bringing new people into the discussion and engaging larger numbers of legal academics in teaching and thinking and writing about the intersection of public health and law.
NPH: Where are you going to be working?
Crossley: Part of the application process was finding a public health agency with which I would like to work and which was willing to work with me to support my application, and I ended up partnering with the San Francisco Department of Public Health.
Approximately 362,100 residential fires left 2,555 civilians dead and another 13,275 injured in 2010, according to the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). They also caused about $6.6 billion in property damage.
According to FEMA, automatic fire sprinklers are the “most effective fire loss prevention and reduction measure with respect to both life and property.” The numbers regarding just home fires are especially impressive: the risk of death drops 80 percent and the cost of property damage drops 71 percent, according to Preemption Watch. And when comparing simple costs to the lives saved, they’re without question cheap. Residential sprinkler systems cost only about $1.61 per square foot to install and typically help lower insurance costs.
When seen through the lens of public health, residential fire sprinklers are an inexpensive and easy tool to prevent injuries and save lives. They’re low in cost, quick to respond, small in size and require little work to install, which makes for a high return on investment.
The successful implementation of more than 300 local ordinances since the 1970’s demonstrates the power of grassroots movements in public health. And, in the reactions by many state governments, it helps illustrate the “preemptive” legislation that can hinder efforts to advance public health.
Aiding in the response and recovery effort in Oklahoma following last week’s tornadoes are several state disaster medical assistance teams (DMATs), requested by Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin. The New Mexico DMAT includes a member, Cliff Rees, who is experienced in law as it pertains to public health emergencies. Rees is the practice director of the Network for Public Health Law’s Western Region.
NewPublicHealth spoke with James G. Hodge, Jr., JD, LLM, Principal Investigator/Director of the Network for Public Health Law’s Western Region, about how knowledge of law during an emergency can help speed assistance to victims.
NewPublicHealth: What is Cliff Rees’ role on the ground?
James Hodge: As a member of the DMAT team, he is well trained in many areas of response and is working with his team to provide needed assistance on multiple fronts. However, Cliff is also capable of assessing legal concerns on the ground if they come up.
NPH: What are some of those concerns?
As school winds down and camps and sports prepare for the summer season, a new study funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and published in the American Journal of Public Health on sports-related traumatic brain injuries in youth sports, is generating deserved attention.
The study, by Hosea Harvey, JD, PhD, Assistant Professor of Law at the Temple University Beasley School of Law, found that while forty four states and Washington, D.C., passed youth sport TBI laws between 2009 and 2012, none of the laws focus on preventing the injuries in the first place. The laws on the books deal primarily with increasing coaches’ and parents’ ability to identify and respond to traumatic brain injuries and reducing the immediate risk of multiple brain injuries.
>>Read more in a Q&A with the Babe Ruth League Inc. about how youth sports leagues are making strides to prevent injuries.
Harvey’s conclusion is that continued research and evaluation is needed to develop a more comprehensive reduction in youth sport traumatic brain injuries.
NewPublicHealth: What did your study address?
Hosea Harvey: I looked at traumatic brain injury (TBI) laws that were passed at the state level that purported to deal with the problem of youth TBIs in sports statewide. I looked at every related state law passed between 2009 through the end of 2012, though most states only had one law that they passed that dealt with youth sports TBIs during that period.
NPH: And your study found that no state that right now has a law that says this is what you have to do in order to prevent these concussions in the first place?
While a growing number of major league sports teams have policies on concussion assessment and return to play, many youth and school sports leagues and teams do not have similar rules, despite thousands of sports-related traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) reported in children and adolescents every year.
Hosea H. Harvey, PhD, JD, Assistant Professor of Law in Temple University’s Beasley School of Law, has just published an article in the American Journal of Public Health analyzing how this health issue is being addressed across the country. He found that there are laws dealing with concussions in youth sports in 44 states and D.C.—but none are focused on preventing the injuries. The laws only address detecting the injuries or preventing an additional injury after one has already occurred.
The study also revealed that many laws don’t draw on evidence around what works. For example, most state laws establish a minimum 24-hour period of youth athlete removal, but there is no scientific agreement about the optimal minimal time someone who has suffered a sports-related TBI should be removed from play. The study utilized an open source dataset from Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grantee Public Health Law Research called LawAtlas.
>>Read the full study.
NewPublicHealth previously spoke with Harvey and Kerri McGowan Lowrey, JD, MPH, Senior Staff Attorney with the Network for Public Health Law — Eastern Region, about legal and legislative approaches to addressing concussions in youth sports. The previous interview is included below:
Crime and violence in U.S. inner cities has a profound impact on public health. The question is how best to combat it. According to recent studies, one answer could be as simple as assigning more police officers to foot patrols in crime hotspots.
With funding in part from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Public Health Law Research program, researchers from Temple University worked with the Philadelphia Police Department to conduct a study on the impact of police foot patrols on inner city crime. Findings published in Criminology in 2011 found foot patrols helped reduce violent crime — at least temporarily — by 23 percent in high-crime areas of the city. A recent follow-up study in Policing and Society revealed a qualitative look at how the participating officers developed extensive local knowledge and formed community relationships — both of which contributed to the cuts in crime.
These and other results demonstrate the need to involve officers on foot patrol in the development of violence prevention strategies, according to researchers.
>> Read more about the study.
While residential use of lead-based paint has been banned in the U.S. since 1978, millions of homes still have the paint, and the health dangers it brings with it, on their walls. Lead paint has been linked to cognitive and behavior issues as well as anemia and even death, especially in young children because their brains are still developing. But according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about half a million children ages 1 through 5 have potentially dangerous blood lead levels.
In Philadelphia, according to the 2009 American Housing Survey data, 91.6 percent of the housing units were built before 1978. Exacerbating the issue, close to 30 percent of families live in poverty, which can delay household maintenance and lead to peeling paint—a major lead risk to children in older homes. Studies also show that the number of children in Philadelphia with elevated blood levels is higher than the national average.
“This problem requires a public health solution since [preventing childhood] lead exposure…involves multiple stakeholders, including the child and parents, the property owner, and the local authorities who make and enforce laws, ordinances and codes,” says Carla Campbell an associate teaching professor in the School of Public Health at Drexel University. Campbell is the author of a new study on a lead court established in Philadelphia in 2003. The lead court is designed to speed the cleanup of lead hazards in apartments and rented homes. Campbell’s research was funded by the Public Health Law Research, a project of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, based at the Temple University School of Law. Campbell’s study appears in a special issue of the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focused on public health law research.
NewPublicHealth recently spoke with Carla Campbell about Philadelphia’s lead court and the implications of its success for other public health issues.
NewPublicHealth: What did your study find?
Nearly 40 percent of private-sector employees in the United States do not have access to paid sick days, making it difficult for them to miss work when they are ill or have a doctor’s appointment. Those who do stay home often suffer lost wages and risk being fired from their jobs. To avoid financial insecurity, employees often go to work while sick, according to the Network for Public Health Law.
Paid sick days, on the other hand, allow employees to stay home or seek preventive care without risking a family’s income or endangering the health of co-workers, customers and others. In fact, one study found that 7 million workers were infected with H1N1 in 2009 because their co-workers came to work sick. To combat this trend, some U.S. cities and one state (Connecticut) have enacted laws requiring employers to provide paid sick days, which was a topic explored in a webinar earlier this year from the Network for Public Health Law.
But as some cities are making moves toward paid sick leave, some state-level legislation is cropping up that could prevent cities and counties from passing their own paid sick days standards and enacting other workplace protections. Such preemption laws are being considered in at least six states, according to a post by Vicki Shabo, Director of Work and Family Programs, for the National Partnership for Women and Families.
"No matter where you live or work, no one should have to choose between job and family because he or she cannot earn paid sick days," said Shabo in the post.
While twelve states currently have laws regulating sales of electronic cigarettes (known as e-cigarettes) to minors, a new post on the Network for Public Health Law blog calls on more states to restrict sales to minors while the Food and Drug Administration continues their review of the device.
E-cigarettes contain nicotine, but no tobacco and often come in kid-alluring flavors such as chocolate and vanilla. According to the Network post, one small FDA study found carcinogens and toxins in e-cigarettes. Health experts are concerned that the electronic devices may also be a gateway tool for young adults to actual, cancer-causing, tobacco-filled cigarettes.
E-cigarette use has skyrocketed among adults, according to a recent study by researchers funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2011, about 21 percent of adults who smoke traditional cigarettes had used electronic cigarettes, up from about 10 percent in 2010. Awareness of e-cigarettes rose from about four in 10 adults in 2010 to six in 10 adults in 2011.
State legislatures recently got underway across the country and many will be considering some critical public health law measures, according to a recent blog post from the Network for Public Health Law.
Critical issues include:
- A smoking ban in Kentucky which could stall in committee
- A bill in Kentucky which could restrict the work of local boards of health.
- A law in Ohio that would require health departments to enter into agreements for shared services and to become accredited.
- Read the Network blog post.
- Use the state legislative tracking page from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials to follow state public health agendas for 2013.