Thygesenlambertsen5603

The purpose of this article is to report some Victorian doctors' general perspectives and knowledge of the new Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 (Vic) (VAD Act). Under the VAD Act, doctors are constructed as the only legal providers of VAD in Victoria. Doctors who are unwilling to participate in VAD therefore constitute a barrier to patient access. MLN7243 This article reports the findings of a small empirical study into how some Victorian doctors with no in-principle objection towards the legalisation of VAD, are orientating themselves towards the law. It also explores participants' understanding of the specific role required of doctors under the law. It finds that participants equate their support for the Act with biomedical ethical principles and generally hold a level of knowledge of the law which is not comprehensive but improves with greater exposure to VAD applications. This study serves as a temperature check of this key stakeholder group's perspectives on the VAD Act in the first eight months of its operation.In November of 2019, New Zealand's Parliament enacted the End of Life Choice Act 2019 (NZ) to authorise the administration of a lethal dose of medication to competent adults suffering from a terminal illness likely to end his or her life within six months, should they directly and voluntarily request it. However, before this legislation can enter into force, it must be approved by a majority of voters at a referendum held at the next general election. This article traces how the End of Life Choice Act 2019 came to be enacted and examines the existing data on public opinion in order to provide a cautious prediction as to that referendum vote's likely result.The abortion drug RU 486 is widely available across the developed world, and its benefits and efficacy for women have been well established over the 40 years since its development. However, access to RU 486 for women in Australia has been a vexed issue since the mid-1990s. Because of pro-life politics under the Howard Government, importation of the drug into Australia was severely hampered, resulting in Australia lagging behind the rest of the developed world in access to medical abortions. This article highlights the history of RU 486, the current state of abortion laws in Australia and the issues that the politics of the 1990s still cause for Australian women who seek a medical abortion (especially those living remotely). Finally, it proposes some options that could alleviate some of the difficulties faced by those who seek access to RU 486.Draft legislation has been approved by the Union Cabinet in India seeking to limit surrogacy to altruistic arrangements with intended parents who are either Indian citizens or couples residing outside the country but of Indian origin. This follows longstanding debates as to whether commercial surrogacy should be permitted. The primary argument against such arrangements has been the potential to exploit and cause harm to surrogate women. There is considerable literature on the exploitation debate, but little has been written about whether these transactions cause harm to surrogate women. Our article addresses this gap in the literature and develops a three-step framework using Mill's harm principle through which to assess whether harm has occurred. We apply this framework to a sample of women who provided surrogacy services in India between 2006 and 2015, the period just before the government moved to ban overseas couples from accessing commercial surrogacy.The outbreak of COVID-19 in China and the resulting global pandemic have necessitated vigorous research into how this new virus works, how it can be cured and prevented, what kind of vaccine will work, and various other issues. To facilitate this research and enable quick scientific progress, rapid and immediate knowledge sharing among researchers globally became essential, including access to existing and new coronavirus-related research publications. This article discusses international responses to the need for immediate and rapid access to global health and medical research to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, and demonstrates how the exercise of copyright control restricts widespread access to knowledge, especially when published in journals. Ultimately, it recommends open access publishing as an effective way of circumventing copyright restrictions on health and medical research.Accurate, up-to-date data are the bedrock of effective public health responses, including in the context of the suffering caused by COVID-19. Any action to inhibit the compilation of such data has ramifications locally, nationally and internationally, and risks impairing the global capacity to respond to the virus. This article contextualises the decision of the government of President Bolsonaro of Brazil to reduce the accessibility of contemporary data about COVID-19 infections in Brazil within his views about, and responses to, the virus. It identifies the nature of actions taken to suppress such data by the Brazilian Ministry of Health and then scrutinises a decision by De Moraes J of Brazil's High Court in Sustainability Network v The President of the Republic of Brazil (ADPF 690 MC/DF, 8 June 2020), which quashed the attempted suppression of public health data. The article hails the decision as an important public health law precedent.The article investigates the legal regime of restrictive measures introduced in Russia due to the COVID-19 pandemic and provides statistical data on the spread of the infection. It describes special administrative violations and criminal offences first introduced during the pandemic violation of therapeutic and epidemiological rules, dissemination of false information, and failure to follow the procedures introduced during the high-alert regime. Judicial and investigative practice is analysed. The most frequent violations of the legislation establishing requirements and restrictions to organisations and individuals during the spread of the new coronavirus infection are identified and issues of classification and differentiation of administrative and criminal liability for violation of sanitary and epidemiological rules and dissemination of false information about COVID-19 are addressed. Judgments by the Russian Supreme Court ensuring a uniform approach to court cases in all Russian regions are analysed.