Just Say No to NOTA: Why the Prohibition of Compensation for Human Transplant Organs in NOTA Should Be Repealed and a Regulated Market for Cadaver Organs Instituted.

The United States faces a shortage of organs for transplantation; thousands of individuals die each year while waiting for organs. The organ donation system relies on altruism because the National Organ Transplantation Act (NOTA) prohibits donors from receiving valuable consideration for organs to be used for transplantation. This paper contains a proposal for a regulated market for cadaveric organs as a mechanism to increase the number of organs available for transplantation. A regulated market for cadaveric organs is appropriate in the United States for the following reasons: (1) it is consistent with the numerous ways in which bodies. are currently treated as commodities; (2) it is unlikely to further disadvantage the poor; (3) it would not expose organ recipients to undue harm; (4) in the current organ transplantation system, everyone except the organ donor, benefits financially; (5) the prohibition in NOTA is inconsistent with laws permitting next of kin to recover for damage to the body of a deceased family member; (6) the protection of the dignitary interests of organs for donation is inconsistent with the current protections of the dignitary interests of human specimens; and (7) permitting a market for organs promotes the American values of autonomy and liberty.

The moral from Sorrell: educate, don't legislate.

This Article argues that in response to the United States Supreme Court's 2011 decision in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., state legislators should refrain from enacting prescription confidentiality laws and instead implement policies supporting academic detailing, a form of continuing medical education in which trained health professionals such as physicians, registered nurses, advanced practice nurses, and pharmacists provide evidence-based information about prescription drugs to prescribers. According to Sorrell, pharmaceutical companies may freely use physicians' prescribing data to better promote, or "detail," products to physicians without government interference. While pharmaceutical companies may profit from detailing drugs to physicians, detailing increases health care costs for patients and negatively affects patient health outcomes. These problems motivated Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont to enact prescription confidentiality laws that banned the use of information about the prescribing habits of physicians to help market drugs to physicians. Recent state attempts to stop drug detailing to physicians have been found to violate the First Amendment. This Article provides a history and background on the pharmaceutical-detailing process and analyzes recent legal decisions relating to prescription confidentiality. It concludes that academic detailing is a viable solution to the negative effects of pharmaceutical detailing and is consistent with the First Amendment.

Expanding Medicaid managed care: the right choice for Texas?

We set out to determine whether expanding Medicaid managed care in Texas is the solution to the challenges faced by the state of meeting the healthcare needs of a rapidly growing Medicaid population while addressing its own fiscal limitations. We reviewed the Texas Medicaid program, the potential effects of federal healthcare reform, and the state political climate through the perspectives (advantages and disadvantages) of the primary stakeholders: patients, practitioners, hospitals, and insurers. Research was performed through online, federal and state regulatory, and legislative review. In addition, we reviewed government and peer-reviewed reports and articles pertaining to issues related to Medicaid populations, healthcare practitioners, and hospitals that serve them. Each primary stakeholder had potential advantages and disadvantages associated with the expansion of Medicaid managed care. We conclude that expanding Medicaid managed care, if done in a manner responsive to the needs of recipients, can meet enrollees' healthcare needs while controlling the state's costs.

Combating childhood obesity with a multiprong attack.

A Central Texas partnership combines the health expertise of a health care system, the financial support of a health plan, and community knowledge of community-based organizations to help children and families combat obesity and learn to lead healthier lives.