You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 283 No. 23, June 21, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Health Law and Ethics
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (12)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Medical Practice
 •Health Policy
 •Law and Medicine
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Public Health Law in a New Century

Part III: Public Health Regulation: A Systematic Evaluation

Lawrence O. Gostin, JD, LLD

JAMA. 2000;283:3118-3122.

Public health interventions need justification because they intrude on individual rights and incur economic costs. Coercive interventions can be justified in only 3 cases: to avert a risk of serious harm to other persons, to protect the welfare of incompetent persons, and, most controversially, to prevent a risk to the person himself/herself.

This article proposes a systematic evaluation of public health regulation. The article recommends that public health authorities should bear the burden of justification and, therefore, should demonstrate (1) a significant risk based on scientific evidence; (2) the intervention's effectiveness by showing a reasonable fit between means and ends; (3) that economic costs are reasonable; (4) that human rights burdens are reasonable; and (5) that benefits, costs, and burdens are fairly distributed.

The 3 articles in this series have sought to provide a fuller understanding of the varied ways in which law can advance the public's health. Public health law should be seen broadly as the government's power and responsibility to ensure the conditions for the population's health. As such, public health law has transcending importance in how we think about government, politics, and policy.


Author Affiliation: Georgetown/Johns Hopkins University Program in Law and Public Health, Washington, DC, and Baltimore, Md.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Use of the Means/Ends Test to Evaluate Public School Dress-Code Policies
Workman and Studak
Educational Policy 2008;22:295-326.
ABSTRACT  

The Role of the Public Health Official in Communicating Public Health Information
Regidor et al.
AJPH 2007;97:S93-S97.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Health of the People: The Highest Law?
Gostin
J Law Med Ethics 2004;32:509-515.
 

Removing Barriers to Local Tobacco Regulation
Fox
JAMA 2001;286:2735-2735.
FULL TEXT  

Public Health Law Reform
Gostin
AJPH 2001;91:1365-1368.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Public Health, Ethics, and Human Rights: A Tribute to the Late Jonathan Mann
Gostin
J Law Med Ethics 2001;29:121-130.
 

Public Health, Ethics, and Human Rights: A Tribute to the Late Jonathan Mann
Gostin
J Law Med Ethics 2001;29:121-130.
 





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.