View Item 

Show simple item record

Adventures in Nannydom: Reclaiming Collective Action for the Public's Health
dc.contributor.authorWiley, Lindsay F.en_US
dc.contributor.authorParmet, Wendy E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorJacobson, Peter D.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-04T20:36:26Z
dc.date.available2016-05-10T20:26:28Zen
dc.date.issued2015-03en_US
dc.identifier.citationWiley, Lindsay F.; Parmet, Wendy E.; Jacobson, Peter D. (2015). "Adventures in Nannydom: Reclaiming Collective Action for the Public's Health." The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 43(s1): 73-75.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1073-1105en_US
dc.identifier.issn1748-720Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/111158
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherPrinceton University Pressen_US
dc.titleAdventures in Nannydom: Reclaiming Collective Action for the Public's Healthen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelLaw and Legal Studiesen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelGovernment, Politics and Lawen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/111158/1/jlme12221.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jlme.12221en_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethicsen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee Agency for Int'l Development v. Alliance for Open Society Int'l, 133 S.Ct. 2321 ( 2013 );!! Wollshlaeger v. Florida 760 F.3d 1159 (11th Cir. 2014).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee, e.g., W. K. Mariner, G. J. Annas, and W. E. Parmet, “Pandemic Preparedness: A Return to the Rule of Law,” Drexel Law Review 1, no. 2 ( 2009 ): 341 – 382 (arguing that respect for constitutional rights supports efforts to protect the public from pandemics).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceW. E. Parmet, “ Beyond Paternalism: Rethinking the Limits of Public Health Law,” Connecticut Law Review 46, no. 5 ( 2014 ): 1771 – 1794; L. F. Wiley, “Sugary Drinks, Happy Meals, Social Norms, and the Law: The Normative Impact of Product Configuration Bans,” Connecticut Law Review 46, no. 5 (2014): 1877–1888; W. E. Parmet and P. D. Jacobson, “The Courts and Public Health: Caught in a Pincer Movement,” American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 3 (2014): 392–397; P. D. Jacobson, “Changing the Culture of Health: One Public Health Misstep at a Time,” Society 51, no. 3 (2014): 221–228; L. F. Wiley, M. L. Berman, and D. Blanke, “Who's Your Nanny? Choice, Paternalism and Public Health in the Age of Personal Responsibility,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 41, no. 1, Supp. (2013): 88–91; L. F. Wiley, “Rethinking the New Public Health,” Washington & Lee Law Review 69, no. 1 (2012): 212–272.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOur collaboration has been part of a larger effort of a group of public health law scholars and practitioners to work together to address the challenges facing public health law. L. Beletsky, W. E. Parmet, and S. Burris, “Advancing Public Health Through the Law: The Role of Legal Academics,” Northeastern Public Law and Legal Theory Faculty Research Paper Working Series, No. 102–2012, available at < http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2148432 > (last visited February 17, 2015 ).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee, e.g., R. Barnett, “The Proper Scope of the Police Power,” Notre Dame Law Review 71, no. 2 ( 2004 ): 429 – 495; R. A. Epstein, “Let the Shoemaker Stick to His Last: In Defense of the ‘Old’ Public Health,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 64, no. 3, Supp. (2003): S138 – S159; M. A. Hall, “The Scope and Limits of Public Health Law,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 64, no. 3, Supp. (2003): S199 – S209; M. A. Rothstein, “The Limits of Public Health: A Response,” Public Health Ethics 2, no. 2 (2009): 84 – 88; T. M. Pope, “The Slow Transition of U.S. Law Toward a Greater Emphasis on Prevention,” in H. S. Faust and P. T. Menzel, eds., Prevention vs. Treatment, What's the Right Balance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceR. E. Barnett, Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty ( Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, rev. ed. 2014 ).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee, e.g., Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 ( 2001 ) (upholding seatbelt law); Simon v. Sargent, 346 F.Supp.277 (D. Mass. 1972), aff'd without opinion, 409 U.S. 1020 (1972) (motorcycle helmet law does not violate due process, notwithstanding claim that “police power does not extend to overcoming right of an individual to incur risks that involve only himself”).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreference132 S.Ct. 2566 ( 2012 ).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee, e.g., 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island, 517 U.S. 484, 507 ( 1996 ) (striking down a regulation prohibiting advertisement of alcohol prices on First Amendment grounds, in part because “[i]t is perfectly obvious that alternative forms of regulation that would not involve any restriction on speech would be more likely to achieve the State's goal of promoting temperance” including taxation and direct regulation establishing minimum prices or maximum per capita purchases); Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748, 770 (1976) (striking down a “highly paternalistic” regulation prohibiting pharmacists from advertising the prices of prescription drugs, but noting that the state “is free to require whatever professional standards it wishes of its pharmacists” so long as they do not implicate freedom of speech); Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677, 684 (1973) (plurality opinion applying strict scrutiny to reject sex discrimination “rationalized by an attitude of ‘romantic paternalism’ which, in practical effect, put women, not on a pedestal, but in a cage.”).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSee, e.g., Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs v. Eschenbach, 495 F.3d 695 (D.C. Cir. 2007 ) (holding that terminally ill adults had no fundamental right to have access to investigational drugs, after surveying the long history of safety and efficacy regulation of drugs for personal use); Lange‐Kessler v. Dept. of Ed., 109 F.3d 137 (2d Cir. 1997) (holding that the right to privacy does not encompass a woman's right to choose a direct‐entry midwife to assist during childbirth).en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceN.Y. Statewide Coal. of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Health & Mental Hygiene, 23 N.Y.3d 681 (N.Y. June 26, 2014 ).en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
jlme12221.pdf
Size:
74.93KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.